PDA

View Full Version : 7 Californians examine their 2nd Amendment Rights in some detail


Two's in
24th May 2014, 18:04
Sadly proving (once again) that it's much easier to buy a gun than mental health care or a hooker; a 22 year old self proclaimed virgin went on a shooting spree in Santa Barbara last night and shot 7 people dead, wounded many others then finally killed himself.

Seven dead including gunman in 'mass murder' California shooting | World news | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/24/drive-by-shooting-near-uc-santa-barbara-leaves-seven-dead)

Hempy
24th May 2014, 18:21
Hey, it's in the Constitution: You have the right to bear arms. Sadly, you're average American brain-dead redneck reads this as 'you have the right to shoot dead anyone your diminished mental state decides is deserving it"
Too many guns, too many morons. You cant remove the morons, so what does that leave??

SpringHeeledJack
24th May 2014, 18:38
Bearing in mind that there are MILLIONS of guns in the USA, it is a fact that such occurrences as above only happen rarely in the big scheme of things. There isn't and perhaps won't be any way to sift out the mentally unstable who will lash out on a large scale with bullets.


SHJ

main_dog
24th May 2014, 18:52
Anyway it's the victims' fault. You see, if they'd only been armed as well, then...

:ugh:

West Coast
24th May 2014, 19:04
Enjoy your lefty circle jerk.

con-pilot
24th May 2014, 19:43
Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, Oh boy, a stupid Yank, anti-gun thread from a bunch of faux superior, European leftist.

We've never, ever, never, ever had one of these before.








Oh wait....:rolleyes:


Now where did I put me bag of Brussels sprouts. :hmm:

500N
24th May 2014, 19:45
West Coast

Just had a look at the LATIMES web site. Top story, click on it,
read article, all it talks about is a semi auto hand gun.

Middle of the page is a box for the videos. Photo used to highlight
the video is, you guessed it, a Black semi auto military style rifle,
30 magazines nicely laid out on the footpath next to it, live rounds
spread around in a pile at the other end next to some stacked mags,
a revolver, 2 black knee pads and a black bag !!!

And the first words on the video use the words "spray" with the caption
underneath being "A lone gunman sprayed bullets from a car in a drive-by
shooting in a southern California college town :rolleyes:

Yet the article and the Sheriff both say he used a semi auto handgun.

Yep, nice agenda at play here !

500N
24th May 2014, 19:52
Hempy

Just remember California has the toughest gun laws in the US
(or close to it) and is very anti gun.

pigboat
24th May 2014, 19:53
...a stupid Yank, anti-gun thread from a bunch of faux superior, European leftist.
And of course no mention of this.

3 Killed 1 Injured at Brussels Jewish Museum.

glendalegoon
24th May 2014, 19:57
boys and girls please.


The shooter has already been called mentally ill. By authorities in the SBA area.

An eyewitness interviewed on CNN identified the gun (firearm to my fellow soldiers) as small enough to be a "air soft" type pistol. It turned out to be a semi automatic (yet we call them automatics) pistol.

IF every "gun" was confiscated (by a government which can't crack down on illegal immigrants) a NUT JOB would take his CAR and just run down a dozen people on the sidewalk.

GUNS in the hands of lunatics are dangerous. SO ARE CARS, CANS OF GASOLINE, AIRPLANES, and many other tools of man.

THE USA has a constitution which allows citizens to bear arms. IF ALL OF THEM WERE INSANE we would all be dead now. BUT WE ARE NOT all dead.

There are probably more guns in the USA than ADULT MEN.

IF you want to outlaw anything, outlaw lunatics.

AS it seems that things like this happen in high schools and colleges, why not demand students undergo mental evaluation as part of the enrollment process.

I DO NOT OWN A GUN (firearm, weapon, ) BUT I FULLY SUPPORT THE SECOND AMMENDMENT>

AND dear british folk, do we tell you what to do with richard quest or piers morgan? SO MIND YOUR OWN business. OH, and didn't one of your little princes wear a nazi uniform. DO you check him for mental illness?

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 20:00
Don't forget folks, those 7 lives are a price worth paying...............

500N
24th May 2014, 20:02
glen

"IF every "gun" was confiscated (by a government which can't crack down on illegal immigrants) a NUT JOB would take his CAR and just run down a dozen people on the sidewalk."

I was going to say the same thing.

This guy would have found some way to take his revenge on the women.


SFFP
As per what Glen said. He would have found an alternative.

GobonaStick
24th May 2014, 20:51
Just lock this thread already. It'll just be the usual nonsense about guns, and luddite comments and uneducated remarks about mental health.

500N
24th May 2014, 20:56
Which is in your eyes ?

glendalegoon
24th May 2014, 21:15
GabonaStick

lock the thread? in our country the only thing we can't say is "FIRE" in a crowded theatre.*

how about yours?


(*assuming there is no fire)

Dushan
24th May 2014, 21:27
Too many guns, too many morons. You cant remove the morons, so what does that leave??

Why can't you remove morons? Can you please elaborate.

West Coast
24th May 2014, 21:28
Mental health isn't a factor?

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 21:30
Why can't you remove morons? Can you please elaborate.


What would you advocate?

Dushan
24th May 2014, 21:35
I am not advocating anything. I am just asking. The statement was made. I am wondering on what basis.

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 21:38
How would you remove the morons?

Dushan
24th May 2014, 21:55
The question is not how to remove them. The statement was that they cannot be removed. I would like to know why that is.

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 22:03
The question is not how to remove them. The statement was that they cannot be removed. I would like to know why that is.


If you disagree with the notion then it stands to reason you already have the answer, I just wonder why you are reluctant to articulate it???????

charliegolf
24th May 2014, 22:33
Oh boy, Oh boy, a stupid Yank, anti-gun thread

Point of Order...

I have NEVER suggested Americans are stupid 'cos they like guns!


CG

John Hill
24th May 2014, 22:48
How would you remove the morons?

A few months of military training would put them on the right path.

glendalegoon
24th May 2014, 22:51
I just read an article on AOL.com news


it mentions the shooter may be the son of the assistant director of the film, ''hunger games''.

it mentions that someone called the cops on him two weeks ago because of the video.

it also says that in 2001, another son of a movie type, USED A CAR TO HIT 4 people in the same town while yelling, "I AM THE ANGEL OF DEATH".

Its not guns, its nut jobs.

brickhistory
24th May 2014, 22:52
Simple me. I click on this thread thinking it would involve some legal effect on the sanctity of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Instead, it is a cheap attempt to make a political viewpoint on the bodies of six innocent victims and one seriously f8cked up individual.

The OP ignores the facts as already known of the killer broke numerous laws:
Assault
Aggravated assualt
Carrying a concealed weapon without a permit (this is an assumption, but it is California)
Possession of a firearm (another assumption, but it is California)
Discharging a firearm within city boundaries (could be multiple charges here),
attempted murder (regarding the wounded) and last, but not certainly least,

murder.

Nope, it's all about the method, not the individual.

As noted, note a peep from the OP or the other Euros about something that simply can't happen in their boundaries because the culture and the laws concerning such simply prohibit the innocent slaughter of three victims in Brussels.

Or any of the shootings in the dear UK over the last week.

Not a peep.

I'm sure the insensitivity towards such by making up such a thread title wouldn't be appreciated and, rightfully, considered poor taste. But given the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it is apparently 'game on.'

Then there's this:
Sadly, you're average American brain-dead redneck

Now I am the average American brain-dead redneck, but your average one does catch irony.

But, to be honest, my support for gun control did increase a bit today.

Out of 200 rounds of .45 acp at 25 yards, I had 12 escape from the X to the nine-ring and one in the eight. :{

Another 50 rounds of off-hand at three yards rapid-fire did all hit center mass, so there's that...

500N
24th May 2014, 22:59
brick

A least the nut job in this case couldn't shoot straight.

He spoke to one blonde girl who thought it was a airsoft gun,
she walked away from the car and he fired at her 3 or 4 times
at close range and missed her - thank god !

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 23:00
Nope, it's all about the method, not the individual.




What would you suggest to stop the individual employing this method?

500N
24th May 2014, 23:00
brick

" Out of 200 rounds of .45 acp at 25 yards, I had 12 escape from the X to the nine-ring and one in the eight. :{"

Nice shooting :ok:

Shack37
24th May 2014, 23:12
Why is it I could predict that this thread (and itīs contents) would appear but not the lottery numbers?

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th May 2014, 23:13
Why is it I could predict that this thread (and itīs contents) would appear but not the lottery numbers?


Its all to do with the odds :ok:

Shack37
24th May 2014, 23:32
Its all to do with the odds :ok:

I do believe youīre right.

cavortingcheetah
25th May 2014, 00:00
Here below for anyone sufficiently interested is a little California law.
http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/pdf/cfl2013.pdf
It's usually not a good thing for society when the law is broken and it's especially sad when people are killed by others using whatever tools happen to be handy.
But you can't stop some of the people from breaking the law some of the time.
The National Firearms Museum at NRA HQ in Fairfax Va has a collection of outstandingly beautiful sporting guns, masterpieces of the craftsmanship of Purdey, Holland and Holland, Westley Richards and others. All of these creations of the gunsmiths' art can be admired, caressed and abused.
The National Firearms Museum: Home of the NRA Gun Collection (http://www.nramuseum.org)
American patriotism is not a concept understood in Europe where ever since the end of WWII forces have been at work to emasculate national pride. The second amendment is part of the envelope of national pride which honours veterans and encourages the acknowledgement of their service.
Veterans | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/veterans)

Lord Spandex Masher
25th May 2014, 00:01
What would you suggest to stop the individual employing this method?

Resorting to grammatical anality or pretending that they haven't seen your questions?

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 00:04
The tough ones will always do that :ok:

mixture
25th May 2014, 00:16
And of course no mention of this.

3 Killed 1 Injured at Brussels Jewish Museum.

Usual clutching at straws nonsense from the "pro-guns for everyone" brigade...:ugh:

How many public shootings have there been in the USA so far this year ? Lots...wikipedia lists 39 in and around schools/colleges alone !

How many public shootings have there been in Belgium so far this year ? Erm... just this one.

Yeah... I thought your argument wouldn't hold up to much scrutiny.... :rolleyes:

brickhistory
25th May 2014, 00:17
Oh, that's me 'analyzed.'

I've seen the question.

It is not for me to solve the 'problem.'

YOU, and your ilk, want the 'problem' solved, YOU figure a workable solution that punishes the lawbreaker, not the law-abiding.

You know, just like all those laws either severly restricting or outright banning of guns have stopped, not slowed, but stopped in their entirety, illegal shootings. It's a pity about those who had never done anything wrong that their rights and property were abridged by the state 'for the good of the many.' The individual must sacrifice. Results are not really important.

How many public shootings have there been in Belgium so far this year? But aren't there laws to prohibit such in place? Yet it happened.
I confess to ignorance on Belgie gun laws, but I assume they are very Euro-like and incredibly restrictive. Yet someone shot someone else. Killed them. How could this happen?

Until then, I will manage with the chaos here in my country. But,in case you are unaware, California is one of the most Europe-like anti-gun states of our 50. You can also find the same in Hawaii, New York (the City), Illinios (particularly Chicago) and Connecticut, as well as the District of Columbia. Veritable paradises of incredible restrictions regarding guns.

You should visit them sometime. Avoid places like Nebraska, Idaho, Utah, Texas, and the like. We'un's is ignorant and crazy...

bcgallacher
25th May 2014, 00:19
Cavorting cheetah - I rather think that you are the one that has no idea of European or British patriotism. We do not indulge in flag waving histrionics that pass for patriotism in the USA but make no mistake we will defend our country when required to do so as we have always done.

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 00:21
I've seen the question.

It is not for me to solve the 'problem.'



Any thoughts though on what could be done?

mixture
25th May 2014, 00:22
But aren't there laws to prohibit such in place? Yet it happened.

The laws and strict controls are the very reason Europe and elsewhere sees far lower gun crime rates then the good old gun toting USA.

You'll never be able to totally eliminate shootings, obviously.... but if you care to look outside your own countries' borders you'll see fine examples of how you can reduce the problem to far more civil levels !

brickhistory
25th May 2014, 00:23
Err, is that why bits of it keeping wanting to leave?

What is "European" patriotism?

And have "European" and "British" become synonymous now?

Interesting...

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 00:27
Err, is that why bits of it keeping wanting to leave?

What is "European" patriotism?

And have "European" and "British" become synonymous now?

Interesting...



An unexpected swerve......................well maybe not that unexpected :p

500N
25th May 2014, 00:29
Those in the EU are so used to telling others what to do this now extends to the USA :rolleyes:


BC
"We do not indulge in flag waving histrionics that pass for patriotism in the USA but make no mistake we will defend our country when required to do so as we have always done."

What is flag waving if it is not patriotism ?

Apart from the "big fat fish" of Scotland who uses it to bait Westminster ??? ;)

cavortingcheetah
25th May 2014, 00:30
Americans generally are allowed to have guns and to use them. The same privileges are not so often found in Europe and really not at all in Britain. Perhaps that's a reflection on the fear that runs through European and British corridors of power as to what a well regulated and armed militia would eventually do to the forces of socialism that govern them. America is still a fair way away from socialism remaining something of a Democracy and it's government has no reason to fear it's armed citizenry.
What goes on in the US by accident, madness or criminal design is no more the business of the Belgians than what goes on there is of the US.
O

mixture
25th May 2014, 00:32
What goes on in the US by accident, madness or criminal design is no more the business of the Belgians than what goes on there is of the US

Since you said what happens in Europe is of no business of the US, kindly go tell your NSA brethren to go stick their monitoring of European leaders and politics where the sun doesn't shine then... their time would be much better spent snooping on the gun owning domestic population of the USA and trying to avoid shootings.... :E

500N
25th May 2014, 00:34
Speaking from the UK, Europe or Australia where they of course don't
monitor leaders of foreign countries !!!

No, of course not, we would never do that :rolleyes:

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 00:36
Perhaps that's a reflection on the fear that runs through European and British corridors of power as to what a well regulated and armed militia would eventually do to the forces of socialism that govern them.


Or perhaps its a reflection on the reality that is letting Tom, Dick and Harry own guns willy nilly.............

TBirdFrank
25th May 2014, 00:47
We were talking about this at my sister's place yesterday.

She has a regular vistor from California who admits to wearing a gun as a matter of course when back home, and who felt undressed walking the streets here at first without one.

After a few visits he is starting to see the reality

A mainly unarmed population largely does not shoot other members of that population at all, let alone in numbers. Yes we had a double killing of two police officers only a mile from my home three years ago by an absolute nutcase, but we haven't had any since - QED

I remember many years ago topping up my Cdn$ reserves for a coach fare to Seatac the next day, late at night on Granville St in Vancouver, and thinking that I would never have dared do it in Hollywood or Seattle at that time of night given some of what I had observed as a tourist with my eyes open.

Civilisation is only a veneer anywhere - but I prefer ours.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 01:09
TbirdFrank


I really prefer our form of civilization.

We could go back and forth on it. Discuss it to the max.

Or we could ask ourselves, where do british people go to afford flying? THE USA.

And where does it NOT MATTER ONE BIT what school you went to? THE USA

And our founding fathers thought it wise to include the right to bear arms in our constitution.

And yours didn't.


Someone mentioned Belgium and the tragedy there, vs the numerous tragedies here in the USA. Gee, Belgium, population 11 million. California alone has about 3.5 times that population.

Not a fair comparison.

We have our share of nutjobs who use guns.

You europeans/british, however you classify yourself have your share of nutjobs too. How many hitlers have we in the USA? And just one managed to tilt the numbers in a very tragic way.

Sorry you guys on your side of the pond. We have a long way to go to come to the nutjob/killing ratio of your aces!

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 01:19
Someone mentioned Belgium and the tragedy there, vs the numerous tragedies here in the USA. Gee, Belgium, population 11 million. California alone has about 3.5 times that population.

Not a fair comparison.


How many gun deaths in California per annum v gun deaths in Belgium per annum?

Then do the math so to speak for a fair comparison :ok:


ps. I don't know the answer :ok:

500N
25th May 2014, 01:21
SFFP

Why worry about it, you live in neither place.


How about I come over to Oxon and start telling you and your family how to live ? Such as all the negatives that Islam imposes on females ????
I'm sure you and your family would like that ?

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 01:23
Why worry about it, you live in neither place.



Irony alert :p:p:p

TBirdFrank
25th May 2014, 01:31
Do the maths - Try again!

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 01:36
TbirdFrank


isn't it great, I get to live in the country I want to with our laws and you get to live in the country you want to with such advantages as getting to spell "COLOR" colour.

And I don't even own a gun, but I SURE HAVE THE RIGHT TO> (again, sorry to any drill sgts who taught me it was a weapon)

500N
25th May 2014, 01:36
SFFP
I have to fight the Bullshyte spewed out by lefty wankers wherever they are,
starting with the UN in NY and going from there. That is because it affects me.

This doesn't affect you whatsoever, you are driven by ideology
and wanting to impose your views on others.



The good thing is, at the end of the day, people just ignore them
/ the UN (such as the Australian PM and Gov't is doing at the moment)
and doesn't it piss them off :O :ok: :D

M.Mouse
25th May 2014, 01:44
I always read these threads and raise my eyes to the heavens.

Citizens of the USA like their constitutional freedoms and their right to bear arms. I do not live their, I enjoy visiting but the acceptance of gun ownership is something I fundamentally do not like. BUT it is absolutely none of my business how Americans choose to govern themselves!

You cannot undo gun ownership to any meaningful extent because of the opposition to it and also because of the abundance of weapons in society already.

European culture is entirely different. We have never had a culture of gun ownership hence, while not impossible, it is far more difficult for a nutter to get hold of guns with which to carry out an attack of the type just seen in California. In the UK we have had notable mass killings by gunshot but they are, thankfully, very rare and I believe it is the difficulty of acquiring guns in the first place which has a direct bearing on that fact.

I generally dislike government prohibitions but, certainly in the UK, I think our gun laws and culture leads to us having fewer madmen with guns inflicting death and destruction on random members of our society.

If Americans are happy with their freedoms then I am delighted.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 02:28
Shame the rest of the Europeans here aren't as reasoned as you.

500N
25th May 2014, 02:37
Agree.

Two very reasoned posts in the last page or two. Nice to see :ok:

Hempy
25th May 2014, 02:38
I'm with M.Mouse. If the good citizens of the USA want to own guns to protect themselves against other good citizens with guns then they can knock themselves out imho. The fact that they can't see the irony of the situation is a little amusing, but they've never been good at honest introspection anyway.

No one is saying you can't all keep your guns, but surely we are allowed to make comment on how fcuked up your country is in this regard. No one expects you to agree...you live there.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/International/homocides_g8_countries_640x360_wmain.jpg

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 02:46
Hempy


too bad you don't know the reasoning behind our right to bear arms.

I would encourage you to read the federalist papers, number 36 I think.

In our country you are allowed to say what you like. Would you be arrested for saying something against your govt?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 03:37
Oh I'm aware of the historical reasons behind it. You all carry guns so you can either take your own Government on if they suddenly go 'rogue', and so you can defend yourselves against the foreign hordes throwing themselves against your shores. All well and good in the 1700's.

Tell me why you carry one today?

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 03:43
hempy

the reason we carry guns now is so all of our citizens could quickly become a giant army TO BAIL OUT certain commonwealths who otherwise would be speaking German now.


tell me, why don't you carry one? oh yeah, you don't have that right.

and you don't know history well enough if you only think we need such things in the 1700's.

now, why don't you go eat some spotted dick. it will make you feel better about not having a right we do have.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 03:45
hempy

the reason we carry guns now is so all of our citizens could quickly become a giant army TO BAIL OUT certain countries who otherwise would be speaking German now..

Dude, if you really believe that in 2014 you are seriously deluded.

500N
25th May 2014, 04:15
Has anyone read the fathers speech of the killer ?
It is eye opening.

All I will say is this kid is the one who got a gun and thought it OK to go around shooting people. Maybe the father should look at the values he instilled in his son (or lack of).

Listen to this

My son's name was Christopher Ross Martinez, he was 20 years old and he died last night," Mr Martinez told reporters on Saturday, his face contorted with despair and rage.

Our family has a message for every parent out there: you don't think it'll happen to your child until it does," he said, reading from a family statement. "Chris was a really great kid, ask anyone who knew him. His death has left our family lost and broken."


His voice shaking with emotion, Mr Martinez rounded on politicians and the powerful National Rifle Association

"Why did Chris die? Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA," he said, raising his voice


"They talk about gun rights. What about Chris's right to live? When will this insanity stop? When will enough people say stop this madness? We don't have to live like this.
"Too many have died. We should say to ourselves: 'Not one more.'

No Hoper
25th May 2014, 04:30
As a lay student of history, it would seem that the European peoples still subscribe to the serf mentality, only their masters can bear arms; perhaps the revolutions in France and Spain should have taught them better.
Whereas when the americans overthrew their overlords, they reserved that ability through the right to bear arms.

Australians were convicts and shouldn't be allowed to bear arms under any circumstance

Hempy
25th May 2014, 04:40
The beautiful bit about Australia is that none of us feel the need to carry guns anyway, and actually feel a bit sorry for those that do. Maybe we are all just happy enough with our manhood without feeling the need to resort to 'enhancements'?

I've never walked down any street in any town or city and even thought about being shot at. Keep your guns mate, you are welcome to them. I hope they serve you well.

No Hoper
25th May 2014, 04:44
Hempy you are not a traveller of remote locations in AUstralia?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 04:46
I come from a remote area of Australia... :rolleyes:

Ascend Charlie
25th May 2014, 04:52
Yet another pointless thread, where those of us who live in fearless countries show amazement that those who live in fearful countries only make themselves more fearful by carrying guns.

Argue back and forth, one will never convince the other.

Easier to close any thread that heads in this direction.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 04:56
Everyone seems to have forgotten that bit about a 'well regulated' militia.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 04:58
Everyone seems to have forgotten that bit about a 'well regulated' militia.

Do tell of it's relevance

edit: honestly, I really don't care. Like I said, you are welcome to them. But anyone who seriously tries to justify them by claiming they are 'protecting the nation' fourteen years into the 21st century is kidding themselves imho. I'm happy to read any well developed rational argument, but I'm pretty sure I'm not going to get one that isn't fatally flawed somewhere..

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 05:11
john hill


the well regulated militia part...our supreme court (not yours) said the two clauses are really not connected and that the clause including the right to bear arms is not dependent upon the militia part.

is it true New Zealand doesn't have any fighter planes except for about 20 A4s in plastic wrap?


500n...that speech is from a father of a victim, not the father of the killer.

Hempy. Does your great country (and it is great) have a legal requirement to register for the draft? When I joined the US Army, I already knew how to shoot WELL. So it was easy for me to transfer my skills from one rifle to an M16.

NO HOPER. For one so young, you are quite wise! Congratulations.

500N
25th May 2014, 05:15
Yes, it is true. They don't have an armed air force aircraft.

Hercs and Helos is about the best they can do ;)


On the other hand, the foot soldiers are pretty good ! :O

John Hill
25th May 2014, 05:16
The text of the Second Amendment reads
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

All the gun fondlers treat some of these words as Holy Writ and ignore the others. It is a rather clumsy sentence by anyone's standards and one modern interpretations could be.."We need an army and anyone can join".

That was hardly a modern idea at the time and whoever wrote the Second Amendment would have surely known of the Assize of Arms of 1181 which was a proclamation of King Henry II of England concerning the obligation of all freemen of England to possess and bear arms in the service of king and realm.

Somehow the Second Amendment has morphed into a personal safety and property protection issue rather than a duty to the country.

BTW, one might ask why there would be a need to state that anyone could join the militia and to understand that requires only considering how the Empire operated at that time when order was kept in difficult colonies by stationing the King's soldiers among the people and for maximum effectiveness the soldiers were always drawn from some other part of the Empire.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 05:19
New Zealand has quite a nice fleet of aircraft for it's needs. They don't have a need for a fighter fleet (unless you would like to share your strategic regional planning that suggests otherwise...). Not sure of the relevance of that to this thread, other than to say if NZ was the USA I'm sure they'd have 20 squadrons of big shiny jets anyway. Just for protection..

John Hill
25th May 2014, 05:23
Not sure of the relevance of that to this thread,

I rather suspect that there would be no mention of NZ if I was not here.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 05:30
Hempy
I've never walked down any street in any town or city and even thought about being shot at..

The few times I have found myself on the streets of a city where every man and his dog was carrying a gun I was always somewhat comfortable being the exception.

Something I learned when I was quite young
like the lizard who spits and stick out his tongue
that the way to get shot is to carry a gun.

I believe that is a bit of Aussie wisdom but I dont know who to attribute it to.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 05:31
Hempy. Does your great country (and it is great) have a legal requirement to register for the draft? When I joined the US Army, I already knew how to shoot WELL. So it was easy for me to transfer my skills from one rifle to an M16.

No, we haven't had a draft since Vietnam. How long since the USA has had an actual draft?

I'm sad that you didn't have enough confidence in your Army instructors to teach you how to shoot well. We don't carry guns, and our soldiers are EXCELLENT shots. Must be the training.

500N
25th May 2014, 05:34
"that the way to get shot is to carry a gun."

Only for dummies like you who wouldn't dream of carrying one,
even to a gun fight !

500N
25th May 2014, 05:36
"We don't carry guns, and our soldiers are EXCELLENT shots. Must be the training."

Hempy

Not all of them are.

And a lot of it has to do with the 1x Optical sight on the Steyr.

Scores jumped dramatically when the Steyr came in, even crap shots
became average or above average shots.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 05:43
hempy

we still require men at age 18 to register for selective service.

and you don't


oh, hempy, do you have a knife? Because the first three people in this tragedy were killed with a knife.

Are knives legal in your country?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 05:44
"that the way to get shot is to carry a gun."

Only for dummies like you who wouldn't dream of carrying one,
even to a gun fight !

Maybe he's just intelligent enough not to attend.. :rolleyes:

John Hill
25th May 2014, 05:46
500N Only for dummies like you who wouldn't dream of carrying one,
even to a gun fight !

Listen up Skippy, I laced up my boots and carried a gun and did what was expected of me which fortunately did not include shooting anyone. I got a lot smarter in later years when I visited war zones and never carried a gun yet here I am today with never a scratch on my leathered hide.

ExSp33db1rd
25th May 2014, 05:57
.......TO BAIL OUT certain commonwealths who otherwise would be speaking German now.

But not until your precious Pearl Harbour ( or Harbor if you prefer ) was attacked, and during the previous 2 years more property had been destroyed, and innocent citizens killed by "terrorists" flying aeroplanes over London than were killed in 9/11.

( not complaining, just sayin' )

West Coast
25th May 2014, 05:57
A war zone? Define a war zone?

Many REMF's are in country but never go outside the wire, as in the safety of the base.

500N
25th May 2014, 06:00
Listen up Skippy,Bouncing to attention :O :ok:


"REMF's"

That's a word I haven't heard for years !

Hempy
25th May 2014, 06:03
500N Only for dummies like you who wouldn't dream of carrying one,
even to a gun fight !

Listen up Skippy.

He's a ring in mate, dont blame us.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 06:06
A war zone? Define a war zone?
Ah, that would be a place where a war is raging, people getting shot, things blown up, death from the sky. That sort of place.


Many REMF's are in country but never go outside the wire, as in the safety of the base.
Sorry, no further information for you.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 06:08
He's a ring in mate, dont blame us.

Did you ever think of giving him his ten quid back?

500N
25th May 2014, 06:08
"He's a ring in mate, dont blame us."

I've done my time !

West Coast
25th May 2014, 06:11
John

That alone tells me you're a Walt.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 06:15
500N Did you ever get paid for the TV series you made?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGiE_t5DztA&list=RDnGiE_t5DztA#t=4

John Hill
25th May 2014, 06:16
That alone tells me you're a Walt.

So sorry old chap but that wont work either.:ok:

500N
25th May 2014, 06:19
John

I thought for a minute you had found the ABC doco that was done
on my selection course which I have been looking for.

So you decided to fight instead of slink away for once :ok:

West Coast
25th May 2014, 06:20
What did you do in the mil? entertain us

And whose mil as well.

500N
25th May 2014, 06:26
Nothing much. I was in during the "great peace" (apart from GW1).
Not long after I left, it all kicked off, the 4 major overseas postings
where virtually anyone could go :{

(The selection course was because I was an Officer and the unit I was in required
all Officers (except SAS Officers for obvious reasons) to pass it.)

Brian Abraham
25th May 2014, 06:27
A war zone? Define a war zone?

Many REMF's are in country but never go outside the wire, as in the safety of the base.Bit hard to think of an in country base, where conflict is taking place, that could be deemed to be "safe". Closest they got to me was a mortar 10 feet from my quarters (good thing I was down the flight line at the time), then there was the 150 dead in the wire the morning after a light and sound show by "Puff" the Magic Dragon.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 06:40
Of course. However there's walking the street or bush with a rifle in hand and there's sitting in a conex box at a major base eating a McDonalds burger. Especially as a civilian.

The burger is likely the most dangerous thing someone inside the wire will see.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 06:51
What did you do in the mil? entertain us

And whose mil as well.

This is a pretty typical tactic of someone without an argument trying to bring completely irrelevant issues to the table in an attempt to whitewash over their lack of anything valid. When you've finished attempting to white ant other peoples arguments with puerile personal attacks and waving your big dick around, please feel free to entertain us with your thoughts on exactly WHY Americans need to carry guns in 2014. I'm really interested to know.

Oh, "because we can" is not a valid answer, I said "need".

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:07
The argument you wish to have has been had. Go use the search function.

No Hoper
25th May 2014, 07:12
The need to carry a weapon. Gun or otherwise.
A gun makes equal a situation which otherwise isn't equal.

Hempy, I'm surprised you are in remote Australia without atleast a .22 rifle or some such.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 07:14
What did you do in the mil? entertain us

And whose mil as well.

To whom is this addressed?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 07:14
The argument you wish to have has been had. Go use the search function.

Yep, I was pretty much sure thats about the strength of what you'd come up with. Solid response :rolleyes:

Hempy
25th May 2014, 07:18
The need to carry a weapon. Gun or otherwise.
A gun makes equal a situation which otherwise isn't equal.

Hempy, I'm surprised you are in remote Australia without atleast a .22 rifle or some such.

Absolutely, and a .303. But they stay in their safe until they are needed for vermin. I certainly don't feel the need to pack a .45 on my hip wherever I go, have any need for an uzi, or have a gun-rack on the back of my 'pickup' with more firepower than some 3rd world countries. Why do you need to CARRY them???

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:22
whom is this addressed?

You.




Yep, I was pretty much sure thats about the strength of what you'd come up with. Solid response

Roger that

John Hill
25th May 2014, 07:25
West Coast You.

Very sorry old chap but many times do I have to tell you that I will not be divulging any more personal details especially to a Tag Team Troll.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:26
Absolutely, and a .303. But they stay in their safe until they are needed for vermin. I certainly don't feel the need to pack a .45 on my hip wherever I go, have any need for an uzi, or have a gun-rack on the back of my 'pickup' with more firepower than some 3rd world countries. Why do you need to CARRY them???


Wow, just like me. Guess that makes you a frenzied gun nut as that's how I and all of the gun owners I'm familiar with operate. You may actually have one up one me as a gun nut, I don't have any ammunition at my house right now.

That makes you particularly dangerous. Someone should take your guns away.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:28
John

Peace corps?

Nothing wrong with it if so.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 07:30
Peace corps?

Nothing wrong with it if so.


I have given you an answer.

500N
25th May 2014, 07:34
"Very sorry old chap but many times do I have to tell you that I will not be divulging any more personal details especially to a Tag Team Troll."


Jesus John, if you are that scared of people on here then you are seriously paranoid and would probably best move on to another forum !

I am not saying laying it all out on the forum but plenty of people know my name, my email address and from there look at the web site and work out who I am and where I live - if they haven't worked out by now with all the military references to Laverton and Pt Cook etc.

In any case, if I really wanted to, it wouldn't take long to work out who you are etc, not that I really care.

The last person who challenge me (and others) on a forum had his school year book photo, Google earth image of his house and a few other choice bits posted within 25 minutes by both me and someone else. And even he was stunned by how fast we were.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:36
For a highly educated person, he wasn't particularly bright.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 07:37
500N, we have the unfortunate presence of a few determined trolls on this site who have done me plenty enough damage already thank you very much.

500N
25th May 2014, 07:38
What, on here ?

No Hoper
25th May 2014, 07:43
Hempy
What he said: Wow, just like me. Guess that makes you a frenzied gun nut as that's how I and all of the gun owners I'm familiar with operate.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 07:43
Absolutely, and a .303. But they stay in their safe until they are needed for vermin. I certainly don't feel the need to pack a .45 on my hip wherever I go, have any need for an uzi, or have a gun-rack on the back of my 'pickup' with more firepower than some 3rd world countries. Why do you need to CARRY them???


Wow, just like me. Guess that makes you a frenzied gun nut as that's how I and all of the gun owners I'm familiar with operate. You may actually have one up one me as a gun nut, I don't have any ammunition at my house right now.

That makes you particularly dangerous. Someone should take your guns away.

A pretty clumsy diversion attempt.....again. To be expected though....again.

If you've read my posts you'll find that I am more than happy for you to keep your guns. And kill each other with them as well tbh.

I just want to know why you need to carry them, that's all. If the answer is 'to protect ourselves against other people carrying guns' then I rest my case.

I don't see how you could honestly answer any differently..

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:43
John, I don't really care enough to investigate you to be on that list.

Why don't you give some screen names?

They're protected by being anonymous.

500N
25th May 2014, 07:47
John

If they have done you "damage", then what the hell are you still doing here
and why the hell haven't you reported them to the mods ?

One of the few times I would or do agree with reporting to mods.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 07:47
WC, give it a rest FFS!

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:49
If you've read my posts you'll find that I am more than happy for you to keep your guns. And kill each other with them as well tbh.

Thing is, I did read your posts, perhaps you should read mine. From your post how I found the parallel between the two of us regarding weapons ownership.

Now just how the hell am I going to answer for all gun owners as you have termed us collectively when I have my weapons locked up, and likely rusted up and with no ammunition?

West Coast
25th May 2014, 07:51
Why John? It's fair game.

No Hoper
25th May 2014, 07:55
Hempy, I can see the direction of your musing.
To some degree, especially in the cities, the major reason would be protection from harm, though not necessarily from another gun.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 07:56
If you've read my posts you'll find that I am more than happy for you to keep your guns. And kill each other with them as well tbh.

Thing is, I did read your posts, perhaps you should read mine. From your post how I found the parallel between the two of us regarding weapons ownership.

Now just how the hell am I going to answer for all gun owners as you have termed us collectively when I have my weapons locked up, and likely rusted up and with no ammunition?

If you read mine you'll see that I didn't ask about your personal situation...I was never insinuating that you were anything but a responsible gun owner, which I am sure you are.

All I asked was your thoughts on why your countrymen feel the need to CARRY guns. Just a general opinion is fine, I don't need any deep analysis. Surely you have an opinion on the subject??

West Coast
25th May 2014, 08:18
I just want to know why you need to carry them, that's all.

A quote from you. I've told you already I don't carry them on me, so you did insinuate I did. If you wish me to opine on others, then phrase it properly so you don't sound like you're simply ranting.


All I asked was your thoughts on why your countrymen feel the need to CARRY guns. Just a general opinion is fine, I don't need any deep analysis. Surely you have an opinion on the subject??

No actually I don't. From carriage of weapons to favorite colors, I don't try to guess what millions of others may or may not be thinking.

I don't live in certain areas where it might be prudent to be armed 24/7, so I don't. Lord knows I don't carry large amounts of cash associated with work or personally, so I don't. I don't venture to the wrong side of the tracks, so I don't. I was raised to respect firearms, which was reinforced in the military, so I don't.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 08:19
Why John? It's fair game.

It is not a fair game when gangs of dishonest trolls invade the pitch.

500N
25th May 2014, 08:21
Saw on the news the other day the spate of car jackings in Detroit.

In broad daylight, with other people around.

The mind boggles !

It seems the city has really gone to the dogs !

500N
25th May 2014, 08:22
"It is not a fair game when gangs of dishonest trolls invade the pitch."


OK John, name them.

And if you think I am one, name me !

John Hill
25th May 2014, 08:27
500N, so now you want to start a flaming row about who is a Tag Team Troll and who is not?

Have you got any sheep on your farm? Do town dogs go on the lam and cause havoc with your flock? How well behaved are those cute little city dogs when you see them in their owner's car at the supermarket? How cute are they when a dozen of them are chasing your young lambs?

Tag Team Trollers are like that, apparently regular good guy forum members (some might even be in human form) but when they pack together, different story..:hmm:

chuks
25th May 2014, 08:28
I was struck by meeting a couple of working-class guys in southern Vermont who were the proud owners of late-model assault rifles, albeit ones that were semi-automatic only. 30-round magazines, laser sights ... serious weapons that cost around one thousand dollars.

These were some kind of Kalashnikov design, made somewhere in eastern Europe, with black plastic furniture. I can't remember if they were AKMs or AK-74s, but they were not bog-standard AK-47s, and, anyway, they were way past what one should need to for murdering Bambi: real, serious military kit. So, why invest so much money in such a thing? Is there any need to do so?

I think the short answer is that there's no real need at all, but just the desire, coupled with, in Vermont at least, the ability to own such powerful weapons. (Vermont has a very broad interpretation of the 2nd Amendment: concealed carry is allowed, with about the only gun restriction being the Federal one on full-automatic weapons.)

We were out there popping away with a borrowed .40 caliber (10-millimeter) pistol, not doing a lot of serious harm thanks to lack of experience, while those two were shredding (BANG- x 30) their targets. "Put the little red dot on the target, pull the trigger, repeat as necessary ... " very impressive. And in between times, I guess their rifles can ride around in the gun racks in the back window of their big pick-up trucks, the ones with the flag stickers on the back bumpers. Not my trip, but who am I to judge?

These guys were not going to be spending their discretionary income on books, trips to Boston's Museum of Fine Arts, not even blowing $25 on a trip to the Latchis Movie Theater to see a live simulcast performance of the Metropolitan Opera ... no, a significant chunk had gone on these weapons, and ammo at, what, a dollar a round? Okay, so they go hunting and score a couple of deer, but for what that cost overall they could probably eat Kobe beef instead and be bucks ahead, but that is their business, not mine and not yours, thanks to the current interpretation of our 2nd Amendment.

With apologies in advance to John Hill for not researching this to his very high standards (for others), I can say that I think that gun crime in Vermont is fairly low relative to our 50 states, despite the lack of legal controls on gun ownership. Of course the danger of a massacre is always in the background, should such a powerful weapon as one of those rifles fall into the wrong hands, but then we allow just about anyone to drive around in vehicles that can also wreak havoc, and to have access to sharp knives, fertilizer and diesel fuel, etc., so ....

John, "Tag Team Trollers" are like your little lambs? Well, some of us do say "Baaahhh!" to your persistent, pathetic attempts at BSing everything even remotely BSable, there is that, but I think you may be taking a somewhat ovine view of reality here. You might want to try getting out more, or else just taking your lithium as recommended.

500N
25th May 2014, 08:31
John

Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe quite a few formed the same opinion about what you said in the North Korea thread and that is why maybe we just mention it ?

And I formed my opinions about what you said without any conversation with others.

Maybe others communicate and make themselves a "Tag Team" as you call it, I can more than hold my own on here without needing a team thank you. If I couldn't hold my own in a discussion, I shouldn't be here and that applies to others as well.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 08:34
If you wish me to opine on others, then phrase it properly so you don't sound like you're simply ranting.
.

please feel free to entertain us with your thoughts on exactly WHY Americans need to carry guns.

Seems like pretty straight forward English language to me. Depending on the readers literacy I guess.

I am disappointed that you don't have any thoughts or opinions whatsoever, especially when you claim the reason is that you only have opinions on things that you have personal experience with. It's a pity that isn't consistent with your thoughts/opinions on the broad variety of other issues that you comment on here (e.g the 'warzone' experience of other posters....etc) but I think we both know that you do actually have an opinion anyway...

West Coast
25th May 2014, 08:36
John, you're the one keeping it alive. You've lumped me and I'll bet 500N as trolls in other threads. Now that your called on it, you retreat.

Name them, and as 500N says, ifImwould among the ones you believe is after your privacy, then say it or shut up about it. I recognize its a comfortable fall back for you.

You can always sue me, right?

500N
25th May 2014, 08:40
John

OK, if you won't say we are part of the TTT, then at least say we are not.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 08:41
500N Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe quite a few formed the same opinion about what you said in the North Korea thread and that is why maybe we just mention it ?


Do you like curry? If you say you like Indian food the troll pack will say you endorse gang rapes of young women on Delhi buses.

I said something on North Korea and the leader of the troll pack said I said something else then all the pack repeated it several times. At what stage did you join the game? I bet you cant even recall what I said... but never mind... North Korea is now a forbidden topic on this forum.

500N
25th May 2014, 08:46
I joined a while ago but got banned so couldn't take part anymore.

Don't like Indians much or Curry and especially when combined ;) :O

John Hill
25th May 2014, 08:47
500N OK, if you won't say we are part of the TTT, then at least say we are not.

That is the strength of tag team trolls, when the troll has started the ball rolling others join in who would otherwise be more civil in their forum behaviour. Just like those little city dogs, nice as pie until they start running with the pack.

Every city pet dog is a potential sheep killer and you can draw what you like from that.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 08:48
Seems like pretty straight forward English language to me. Depending on the readers literacy I guess.

I read your words, that they failed to convey your intent is your failure not mine.

To my knowledge I've not tangled with you in the past, as such my default is to give an unknown poster credit perhaps not due. Why I thought would a person ask another to provide an opinion that covers millions of people with differing needs, priorities, personalities, rationale, etc.

I have now readjusted my baseline presumption for continued interaction.

You make it sound as if there's a singular reason one might carry a gun. If there was, I might be able to gin up an opinion.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 08:50
West Coast
John, you're the one keeping it alive. You've lumped me and I'll bet 500N as trolls in other threads. Now that your called on it, you retreat.

Name them, and as 500N says, ifImwould among the ones you believe is after your privacy, then say it or shut up about it. I recognize its a comfortable fall back for you.

You can always sue me, right?

How many times did I ask you to leave the matter of my personal details alone?

West Coast
25th May 2014, 09:07
You raised the point of your military service, not I. You brought it into the public domain, not I.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 09:11
Give it a rest.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 09:19
I think I will, it's approaching the bewitching hour.

Trolls have to get rest as well.

Bottom line, don't bring into the debate things you don't want questioned.

kms901
25th May 2014, 09:21
Wow, what thread drift. Why does any attempt at discussing " the right to arm bears" always descend into back biting and willy waving ?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 09:23
Seems like pretty straight forward English language to me. Depending on the readers literacy I guess.

I read your words, that they failed to convey your intent is your failure not mine.

I'll use smaller words in future :rolleyes:

You make it sound as if there's a singular reason one might carry a gun. If there was, I might be able to gin up an opinion.

Um, you'd hope 'self defence' would be pretty high up on the list wouldn't you? I mean, if you were to take a survey? Actually I'm struggling to think of another reason why someone would feel the need to carry a gun. I was hoping your big brain might help me out with others but it seems not.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 09:30
West Coast
I think I will, it's approaching the bewitching hour.

Trolls have to get rest as well.


Yes, maybe you will have better luck tomorrow.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 09:42
you were to take a survey?

I believe you to be fully capable of your own survey.


I'm struggling to think of another reason why someone would feel the need to carry a gun

Yet it's my big brain in question. How about working on the survey before you draw your conclusion, it's kinda the way things are supposed to work.

Hempy
25th May 2014, 09:46
Bahaha ok, I'll give up. You'd make a good politician mate, a whole heap of hot air without actually saying anything of any value. Cheers for you important contributions to this thread! :)

West Coast
25th May 2014, 09:51
Might I say the same about you without any feelings hurt?

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 10:14
An interesting article

BBC News - Elliot Rodger is Isla Vista drive-by killer - US police (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27562917)

Two bits that leap off the page for me

'Sheriff Bill Brown: "All of these weapons were legally purchased...and were all registered to the suspect'

and

'Earlier, Peter Rodger's lawyer, Alan Shifman, said that the "family believes the child was the perpetrator".

He said Mr Rodger's son had Asperger syndrome, had trouble making friends and had been receiving professional help.'

Perhaps the question to be asked is why it would be legal for a person with a mental illness to buy and own a gun?

Or, looking back at the Adam Lanza case perhaps even to ask why a gun should even be allowed in the same house as someone with a mental illness?

Perhaps it's time to tighten up the 2nd to avoid this sort of thing?

500N
25th May 2014, 10:31
Sffp

Whether I agree with you or not, I would fight to the death any proposed change to the 2nd if I was in the us.


How about - the parents called the police as they were worried, shy didn't they take his guns away. Why didn't the police do the same ?

hoe about the parents take dome action.

The video is pretty damning.

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 10:42
Sffp

Whether I agree with you or not, I would fight to the death any proposed change to the 2nd if I was in the us.


How about - the parents called the police as they were worried, shy didn't they take his guns away. Why didn't the police do the same ?

hoe about the parents take dome action.

The video is pretty damning.

Did I read that right, you are advocating that someone should have taken his guns away from him :eek:

You do of course realise how that notion flies right in the face of the 2nd?

Hence my thought that maybe the 2nd needs a tweak here and there :ok:

Hempy
25th May 2014, 10:46
Might I say the same about you without any feelings hurt?

Please be my guest, the good ole "am not...you are" defense is up there with "my dad is bigger than your dad!" No feelings hurt here!! ;)

Ascend Charlie
25th May 2014, 11:01
Something I learned when I was quite young
like the lizard who spits and stick out his tongue
that the way to get shot is to carry a gun.

I believe that is a bit of Aussie wisdom but I dont know who to attribute it to.

That would be the great John Williamson, who sings BOTH kinds of music - country AND western.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 11:49
John Williamson, of course, Drover's Boy and And The Band Played Waltzing Matilda.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 11:52
exsp33bird

your view of history is a bit off. you might even look up that 7000 US marines relieved your forces in Iceland prior to Pearl Harbor.

And that we were building and sending you planes and ships prior to Pearl.

And providing the neutrality patrol in the north atlantic to relieve your navy prior to Pearl.

And john hillllllll

again, our supreme court has ruled that the militia part is not the operative clause in the 2nd. the only part that matters is the right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon.


and john hill and hempy, read the current reports, the first three killed were by KNIFE and not gun. are you allowed to pack a knife in the land down south?

John Hill
25th May 2014, 12:11
Oh no! We dont want to hear about how America saved Britain from invasion and likely defeat again!

John Hill
25th May 2014, 12:13
again, our supreme court has ruled that the militia part is not the operative clause in the 2nd. the only part that matters is the right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon.

I guess they just had a few spare words they needed to fit in somewhere!

500N
25th May 2014, 12:17
Glen

"are you allowed to pack a knife in the land down south?"

In Australia - or most states, no - definitely in Vic and NSW, you can't carry a knife, concelaed or in a belt pouch. That includes a Leathermen or Swiss Army that has a knife in it. In fact even having one in a car might get you in the shyte !!!

The only exceptions (at least in Vic) are if you have a valid reason.
The laws came in when I was diving and a few trades / hobbies
kicked up a stink over the laws as legally it meant you couldn't
walk from the car park to the boat with a knife on your leg.

500N
25th May 2014, 12:20
John,

"Oh no! We dont want to hear about how America saved Britain from invasion and likely defeat again!"

Well, face facts John, Britian might have won the Battle of Britain by itself (ie not with Yanks but with other Commonwealth countries) but by Christ you have to admit that America helped out with one hell of a lot of supplies and a life line that kept the UK going.

And then following that little skirmish, having the yanks fully on board made life a lot easier.

FFS, give credit where it is due !

Lord Spandex Masher
25th May 2014, 12:30
Did I read that right, you are advocating that someone should have taken his guns away from him :eek:

You do of course realise how that notion flies right in the face of the 2nd?

Hence my thought that maybe the 2nd needs a tweak here and there :ok:

I wish there was a tumble weed smilie...

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 12:34
and john hill and hempy, read the current reports, the first three killed were by KNIFE and not gun. are you allowed to pack a knife in the land down south?


Are you allowed to pack a knife in California?


It would appear the guns were legal so maybe the knife was as well..................

Ken Borough
25th May 2014, 12:35
Glendalegoon. Name says it all really. :}

Superpilot
25th May 2014, 12:36
Dad directs a movie where kids kill kids in the name of "sport", son also kills kids. Hollywood is desensitizing our young whilst we sit dumb, blind and happy.

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 12:38
Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/540385-7-californians-examine-their-2nd-amendment-rights-some-detail-post8492191.html#post8492191)
Did I read that right, you are advocating that someone should have taken his guns away from him :eek:

You do of course realise how that notion flies right in the face of the 2nd?

Hence my thought that maybe the 2nd needs a tweak here and there :ok:


I wish there was a tumble weed smilie...


I know, I was really surprised to hear 500 actually advocating gun control, not sure that is going to sit well with the usual suspects :E

500N
25th May 2014, 12:42
If one of your son's went nuts in the house with a knife,
would you take it off him ?

If you son continually drank and drove his car, pissed as a fart,
would you try to take the car keys from him ?

I wouldn't call what I said as gun control - I know you lot would
like to lump it all in together as you usually do.

The parents called the Police they were so worried.


BTW, I see they are saying the Son is British born ?????

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th May 2014, 12:49
If one of your son's went nuts in the house with a knife,
would you take it off him ?

If you son continually drank and drove his car, pissed as a fart,
would you try to take the car keys from him ?

I wouldn't call what I said as gun control - I know you lot would
like to lump it all in together as you usually do.

The parents called the Police they were so worried.


BTW, I see they are saying the Son is British born ?????


It also says the son was 22 which makes him well into manhood, at what point do parents cease to control their kids?


The parents knew their mentally ill son was about to do bad with his guns and called the police, not sure there was anything more they could do short of risking becoming victims themselves.


The point you and others predictably shy away from is quite simplistic, why was a mentally ill man allowed to legally purchase and subsequently own guns in the first place?

Toadstool
25th May 2014, 13:05
BTW, I see they are saying the Son is British born ?????

He was. What is your point with this exactly?

Hempy
25th May 2014, 13:25
BTW, I see they are saying the Son is British born ?????

He was. What is your point with this exactly?

That would be the national inferiority complex rearing it's head again...apparently pointing out the fact that the perpetrator is not a native born son of the brave New World is proof that you don't have to be American to be a loon. The fact that this is obvious seems not to have been considered.

Bushfiva
25th May 2014, 14:51
His posts on a bodybuilding forum make interesting reading, as does his 140-page manifesto, and as did his Youtube videos. Quite a troubled person.


http://www.docdroid.net/ckku/im-tired-of-seeing-losers-with-hot-chicks-bodybuildingcom-forums-.pdf.html (http://www.docdroid.net/ckku/im-tired-of-seeing-losers-with-hot-chicks-bodybuildingcom-forums-.pdf.html)
http://ja.scribd.com/doc/225960813/Elliot-Rodger-Santa-Barbara-mass-shooting-suspect-My-Twisted-World-manifesto (http://ja.scribd.com/doc/225960813/Elliot-Rodger-Santa-Barbara-mass-shooting-suspect-My-Twisted-World-manifesto)

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 15:11
Wow, I carry a swiss army knife in my pocket every day (tsa aside). Imagine not being able to carry a simple pocketknife in a country like Australia, New Zealand, Or England.


John Hill, so you don't want another lesson in the US's aide to England (and Free France for that matter) in WW2. Then you have learned your lesson well enough.

The constitution of the USA depends upon the idea of a reasonable, rational human. Certainly the killer was not a rational human being and diagnosed with the same illness as the sandyhook killer.

The thread title should really be changed. 3 of the victims were killed with a knife. 3 were killed with a gun. 1 was a suicide (with a gun).

The shooter should have been committed and it should have been done by his therapists (plural).

superpilot has a good point.

burough...says it all.

Dushan
25th May 2014, 15:40
New Zealand has quite a nice fleet of aircraft for it's needs. They don't have a need for a fighter fleet (unless you would like to share your strategic regional planning that suggests otherwise...). Not sure of the relevance of that to this thread, other than to say if NZ was the USA I'm sure they'd have 20 squadrons of big shiny jets anyway. Just for protection..

Apparently they were attacked by France, recently.

Dushan
25th May 2014, 15:51
500N, we have the unfortunate presence of a few determined trolls on this site who have done me plenty enough damage already thank you very much.

Damage? What kind of damage? Seriously?

SMT Member
25th May 2014, 16:03
Wow, I carry a swiss army knife in my pocket every day (tsa aside). Imagine not being able to carry a simple pocketknife in a country like Australia, New Zealand, Or England.

I've successfully lived my whole life without any need to carry a pocket knife, anywhere. But I don't have hard time imagining why someone would need to; our world is big and diverse, and what some people find essential others find utterly useless.

As for the Yanks killing themselves willy-nilly on the back of very lenient gun laws, you have my complete backing. The world is overpopulated as it is ...

cavortingcheetah
25th May 2014, 16:26
American gun laws are not lenient. It isn't really a question of lenience. American gun laws are in reality nothing more than restrictions upon the second amendment.
There is always likely to be an attrition rate when people who are not mentally qualified to do so can obtain firearms. But in cases such as these, those who are so qualified have the legal and moral capability to shoot those who aren't, thus relieving society of the necessity of permanently supporting its own debris.
One proposal now under consideration is a tightening up of Homeland requirements for British citizens. Britain is a known international terrorist haven. Action might be taken to ensure that British passport holders travelling to the USA are required to apply for a visa before commencement of travel.
In the case of recent war disturbances between New Zealand and France; New Zealand was harbouring a vessel which had been engaged in acts of piracy against French interests. In true British naval tradition, a cutting out exercise was mounted by the French with the objective of disposing of the enemy with minimum loss. This objective was achieved.

Dushan
25th May 2014, 16:33
Zealand was harbouring a vessel which had been engaged in acts of piracy against French interests. In true British naval tradition, a cutting out exercise was mounted by the French with the objective of disposing of the enemy with minimum loss. This objective was achieved.

Too bad they didn't get rid of all the other Greenpeacniks, while they were at it.

KBPsen
25th May 2014, 17:07
Too bad they didn'tYeah, because killing people is just such a mundane thing to do. You ****.

Shack37
25th May 2014, 17:39
"Whether I agree with you or not, I would fight to the death any proposed change to the 2nd if I was in the us."


You are Charlton Heston and I claim my $100

ExXB
25th May 2014, 18:18
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:

The US Supreme Court said this, surprised they weren't taken behind the building and shot.

500N
25th May 2014, 18:31
KBPsen

Well, if you want to engage in illegal activities then sometimes the consequences are quite severe.

The only problem with the whole raid was the one person killed was
the one person who didn't need to be !


Dushan
Re "Damage ? What kind of damage ? Seriously ?"

He wouldn't answer the question about who or what.

Hell, we might get into some serious and heated discussions on here
and disagree between ourselves but attacking someone outside of the
forum ????? Come on, either we have some real whackos on here or
John is delusional.

con-pilot
25th May 2014, 18:46
I've successfully lived my whole life without any need to carry a pocket knife, anywhere.

I don't know if you are a professional pilot or not, however, I am, well was now that I am retired, but I carried a pocket knife either in my pocket or in my briefcase for over 40 years during my flying career.

Didn't need to use it a lot, but when it was needed, I was very happy I had one.*

And I still carry one to this day, just out of habit I suppose and shockingly enough to you I guess, still find need for its use from time to time.




* One time I really needed my pocket knife, when we managed to lock all three of us out of the cockpit of a 727 I was flying. But it was in my briefcase, which was in the cockpit behind the locked door. :(

But I never made that mistake again, kept it in my pocket when flying, just in case.

Oh, I should point out that we were on the ground when we got locked out of the cockpit.

Keef
25th May 2014, 18:52
Wow, I carry a swiss army knife in my pocket every day (tsa aside). Imagine not being able to carry a simple pocketknife in a country like Australia, New Zealand, Or England.

Pardon?

I live in England. I have a Leatherman Charge (including 2 knives and a fair bit more) on my belt pretty much all the time. It's a very handy tool, which gets used several times most days. I know of no law that says I can't carry it, and I've used it in the presence of police officers without them showing the slightest interest.

As for "carrying guns": until relatively recently, there were few restrictions on guns in the UK either. I was given a 12-bore for my 14th birthday - I still have it. The law here has got tighter as time has passed - handguns are now banned altogether after one nutcase went on the rampage. Shotguns and rifles need a permit, but that can be obtained (I've had no problems renewing mine).

The difference is in what you do with it and what types are allowed. Carrying a gun in the street (other than in a case) would get you arrested here. Pump-action and repeater guns are no longer allowed.

I can't see anyone overturning the NRA mandate that all Americans can "carry", whether or not they belong to a militia (well-regulated or otherwise).

I am befuddled by the theory that a citizens' militia could overthrow the government of the USA - I thought ballot boxes were used for that (mind you, I thought that was the case in Crimea, until recently).

It's a very wide cultural divide, and not one where US and European opinions are ever going to align.

500N
25th May 2014, 18:55
I've successfully lived my whole life without any need to carry a pocket knife, anywhere.


Well if you don't do anything in your life, I can well imagine it.

500N
25th May 2014, 19:05
Reading up on this nut case, I think he would have done what he did whether he had a gun or not.

The fact he killed 3 housemates with a knife shows he was capable and
in some ways, using a gun probably brought it to an end sooner as with
a knife behind closed doors, who knows what would have happened.

brickhistory
25th May 2014, 19:25
I am befuddled by the theory that a citizens' militia could overthrow the government of the USA - I thought ballot boxes were used for that (mind you, I thought that was the case in Crimea, until recently).


There is historical precedence for such in this country. One was successful against the English, one against the U.S was not.

But the concept is alive and well. The recent BLM stand-off was a microcosm of such. Not that the ragtag armed citizens could, by themselves, hold off a government force, but their very presence did dissuade Uncle Sam from proceeding as he had intended with armed force.

Multiply that by an order of magnitude due to an overbearing government trying something like, say, confiscating private citizens' firearms and the concept is not that far-fetched.

Those on the government's side - military and law enforcement - would suffer massive defections to the citizens'. Hard to be powerful without the manpower.

It's a very wide cultural divide, and not one where US and European opinions are ever going to align.

Indeed. So to those who find us 'curious' to use a polite phrase but willing to let us live as we wish, I thank you. I, too, don't wish you to change unless you want to do so.

To those foreigners who insist on telling us what we should do, may I remind you, as is so often the case, you are completely and utterly irrelevant.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 19:41
first, to the kid (age 35) who never carried a pocket knife, you are young, what do you know? In fact you are just barely old enough to be president of the US. Lucky for us you are not a citizen.


KEEF, as to your befudlement. IF you took the time to read US history and the Federalist Papers (36 I think). You would find that our founding fathers (God Bless them truly for their wisdom) advocated an armed force of only a certain size that could be defeated if the armed force (army/navy etc) attempted to subjugate or impose tyrany or up a king etc upon the citizens. The citizens could then rise up and even defeat the army who attempted to install a king or other tyrant.

Our army of course would not turn on the citizens. But 300 million citizens against an army of what, 5 million ( all branches etc) would eventually win. Yes, it would be messy if the armed forces used nukes, but then, who would be left to rule?


The young man, with great wisdom, from Iraq brought up a good point and I will expand upon it.

ONCE A SERF, ALWAYS A SERF.

ONCE A FREEMAN (or woman) ALWAYS A FREEMAN>


New Hampshire's motto is : Live Free or Die.

Try it some time.

500N
25th May 2014, 19:50
"The recent BLM stand-off was a microcosm of such."

Was it ever, and I bet it sent shockwaves through the Gov't all the way up to Obama and they are now working out that maybe they can't push too far, or, how to combat it - let's order another million rounds of ammo !

BenThere
25th May 2014, 20:12
I continue to ponder the whys that little attention is given to the on-going gun carnage and death that plays out nearly every day in the nightmare environments of our many heavily African-American urban cities. Many, many more were killed in such places than all the rampages by deranged rampage killers over the last 50 or so years since Speck and Whitman - Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Baltimore, St. Louis, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Cleveland - all of which were once thriving metropolises, where things used to be manufactured on a grand scale, are dangerous now to even transit. That gets no coverage or analysis, though the toll is greater every single day.

Something went wrong, and the always ready accusations of racism inhibit our ability to address, or even talk about it. The fact is the family destruction brought about by 'The Great Society', which introduced paying young women a stipend for having children, with a raise for each one produced, no identified father required, all in the name of compassion for the blameless children, set in motion consequences that take an ever-greater toll, maybe even becoming the breaking point for our economy and social fabric as we attempt to meet the needs and demands of this increasing underclass and electoral constituency.

I don't know how it's going to play out. I think, though, the denouement is going to be ugly.

I think possessing a small personal armory is a rational and wise strategy.

500N
25th May 2014, 20:20
I think you'll have a lot more guarded gated communities in the US.

Re those areas, if I lived anywhere near any of them I'd also have
a personal armoury plus a few more anti trespass devices.

finfly1
25th May 2014, 20:42
Something I rarely do, is respond to a thread without reading it all.

I have not the time nor stomach for the nine pages after the one I read.

I will respond briefly to what to do with morons, a question raised early on.

When I was a young worker, the county in NY in which I lived and worked had four state hospitals devoted to care and housing of mental patients. They were Pilgrim State, Kings Park State, Central Islip State and Edgewood State hospitals. Built by the WPA in the 30's they were massive structures, so well constructed that it literally took more money to tear them down than it did to build them. Two of them had their own railroad sidings for fuel for their generators. They had farms and were in many ways almost self sufficient.

The fact that they all stand empty today means that somewhere in the neighborhood of fifty thousand mentally people are now elsewhere, most of them in the same county. On a regular basis, they kill people, push folks onto the subway tracks, throw babies off 15th floor balconies, and routinely harass if not terrorize those around them.

With impunity. Those who rule the state have decided that their rights to live free and do whatever they wish to whomever they wish supersede the rights of society to have such individuals restrained from such behavior.

SMT Member
25th May 2014, 21:01
first, to the kid (age 35) who never carried a pocket knife, you are young, what do you know? In fact you are just barely old enough to be president of the US. Lucky for us you are not a citizen.

If you'd care to read what I wrote, I know enough that my experience does not cover every single person on the planet. As for not being a citizen, were I a religious man, I might have considered giving thanks for being fortunate enough not to be born in the US, thanks. As for not being a citizen, my passport says otherwise. But, of course, as an American you are blissfully unaware there are other countries in the world where, surprise!, people are also citizens.

Our army of course would not turn on the citizens. But 300 million citizens against an army of what, 5 million ( all branches etc) would eventually win. Yes, it would be messy if the armed forces used nukes, but then, who would be left to rule?

Right, so 300 million citizens armed with AR-15s and six-shooters, against entire armored battalions, infantry divisions, artillery brigades, air force squadrons and navy task forces would stand a chance? Which parallel universe are you from?

Tosser.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 21:31
smt member

I am truly glad you are a citizen of another country.


300 million people with Ar15's and everything else would defeat an army with all the gadgets in the world. Fortunately for the US, we will never have to find out.

What parallel universe do you come from? I think a great deal of the US navy but don't think a task force can make it to Nevada.

I think a great deal of the USAF but don't think they could bomb everyone to death and still have anything left to rule.


So troll away.

John Hill
25th May 2014, 21:34
Right, so 300 million citizens armed with AR-15s and six-shooters, against entire armored battalions, infantry divisions, artillery brigades, air force squadrons and navy task forces would stand a chance? Which parallel universe are you from?

I doubt that would be the way the game would be played. I think something more like this:--

A small 'army' of citizens would make a stand, maybe Ruby Ridge multiplied by a hundred or so. The government forces would suffer casualties and that would be the justification for more draconian restrictions on ordinary peoples freedom. Eventually the entire country would be in what the Yanks 'lock down' and the 300 million rag tag band would never get to take the field.

Or it might go quite differently, maybe the 300 million would defeat the forces of law and order and the military! But what would happen next? Afghanistan endured several years after the USSR left while factions of those who defeated them fought among themselves for control while the ordinary people starved, were maimed or died. Eventually the Taleban came to town and imposed a form of order. Would America be so lucky?

I thought the Pacific Ocean was a big place when I sailed across it on a small sloop but if I live long enough I might get to feel it should be a lot wider than it is.

500N
25th May 2014, 21:38
John

Except if part of the so called Gov't forces decided to be on the
side of the 300 million.

And BTW, the 300 million have more than just AR-15's and a few six shooters. And that is without anyone taking over US Military armouries which would add a whole new level of inventory. And before you say it wouldn't happen, most of the similar situations I have read about have involved exactly that.

Mr Chips
25th May 2014, 21:59
I love this...

A small 'army' of citizens would make a stand, maybe Ruby Ridge multiplied by a hundred or so. The government forces would suffer casualties and that would be the justification for more draconian restrictions on ordinary peoples freedom. Eventually the entire country would be in what the Yanks 'lock down' and the 300 million rag tag band would never get to take the field.

So the revolution comes, the Government just needs to ban it. Yeah, that should work!
:ugh:

500N
25th May 2014, 22:02
john seems to forget that a rag tag "army" managed to give the US and allies one hell of a bloody nose in Afghanistan.

Now imagine X million in the US who are also on home soil,
I would say they could do the same.

West Coast
25th May 2014, 22:03
John, for a senior you have an active imagination. Doesn't relate to reality, but it's still active. Your scenarios are so disparate in nature that they draw your thought process into question. Or you could be stirring the pot with throwaway posts.

500N
25th May 2014, 22:11
People always seem to think that the Gov't has the upper hand in training, techniques, weapons etc etc.

With the exception of the big items - tanks, ships, aircraft, helos, satellites
almost everything else is available to the citizens of the US with the the right moves.

And some would debate that some of those 5 would be available as well.

In addition, how many millions of trained people as in ex mil are out there,
many now combat veterans.

IMHO, it would not be a one way shooting range by any stretch of the imagination, with the US Gov't forces being caught in the same scenario they found themselves in Iraq.

BenThere
25th May 2014, 22:17
Should events come down to a civil war, who knows what could happen? I, too, think the preponderance of the armed forces would tilt conservative, making the ability of the federal government to suppress the revolution questionable.

I'd like to see, and would predict, protection would go toward the Red states, while the Blue states would fall into anarchy. At the end, a new nation would emerge, rid of the sclerosis of the left, the Constitution restored, and happiness would reign throughout the land. Illinois, California, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Delaware, New Jersy, Hawaii and a few more, would be left to fend for themselves.

I hope to live to see it, the vision gives me a warm sense that all is right with the world as I lay my head on my pillow each night. That new America will be better than ever. You'll find me in Texas.

If veterans got behind the resistence, you have no idea of the power they could generate.

500N
25th May 2014, 22:23
California should be cut off by itself anyway !

They say it is big enough to look after itself, so let them.

(Have to cut out two enclaves, one for the SEALS and
one for the Marines :O)

West Coast
25th May 2014, 22:26
I don't like snow, it gets too bloody hot in Arizona, so I propose that San Diego be a part of the new order. LA and north can float off to NZ

ruddman
25th May 2014, 22:33
No thanks. We prefer our side of the planet to be free of people with sh*t ideas please.

Citizens vs the government. Lol. Is this the comedy thread? A few nuclear bombs later on their own citizens and the world will be a better place. Finally we can introduce real man size burgers to that side of the world!!!


Anyway, while people are concerned about carrying guns to protect themselves from the government - meaning other citizens carrying guns to protect themselves from other citizens - in civilised counties we are hearing ourselves up for some real football!! No helmets. No pads. Lol. They might as well wear skirts.

State Of Origin!!!!!



Go QLD!!!!:ok:

John Hill
25th May 2014, 22:38
500N john seems to forget that a rag tag "army" managed to give the US and allies one hell of a bloody nose in Afghanistan.

Now imagine X million in the US who are also on home soil,
I would say they could do the same.

Wrong history book.

500N
25th May 2014, 22:39
John

WTF are you talking about, wrong history book ???

BenThere
25th May 2014, 22:45
California would split up. Only the corridor from LA to SF is lefty. The Central Valley and hopefully, San Diego, would swing toward the patriots.

ruddman
25th May 2014, 22:47
Who are the patriots playing again, Benthere?
Where are they on the ladder?


Go QLD!!

BenThere
25th May 2014, 22:48
Who are the patriots playing again, Benthere?

The forces of Evil, of course.

kms901
25th May 2014, 22:50
300 million against the government ? An awful lot of minorities to take away from that number !

BenThere
25th May 2014, 22:53
You'd be surprised at how many patriotic ethnic minority Patriots there are.

ruddman
25th May 2014, 22:54
The forces of Evil, of course.

Which so far is its own citizens. :ok:

So you fight each other to the death, the government never has to intervene because its nicely drawn out 2nd amendment keeps firepower in the hands if the good, bad and ugly.
Total decimation and the government sit back like the rest of us and laugh their heads off. :D


How arrogant is Paul Gallen!! When you've lost 8 origin serious in a row, I'd be shutting my mouth. :ugh:

BenThere
25th May 2014, 22:58
So you fight each other to the death

It won't be to the death, but only to capitulation and assumption of control.

Dushan
25th May 2014, 22:59
What everyone seems to forget, or overlook, is that legally the US military cannot be deployed on US soil. Not that the Constitution Dismantler in Chief would not try but many, if not all, senior officers would refuse to obey an unconstitutional order.

BenThere
25th May 2014, 23:03
But we know that the tyrant will disregard the Constitution, disregarding the legality. As a previous poster suggested, the troops will defect in favor of the USA as the Constitution created it.

ruddman
25th May 2014, 23:04
It won't be to the death, but only to capitulation and assumption of control

It's already happening now at a rate of over 32,000 per year. Another major crash like the one coming over there and that number will climb.

Suits those in the big shiny white casa too. They sit back and enjoy the show.



Nice to have a 'dream' I guess. Mine is for QLD to wipe the floor with NSW this Wednesday night.

glendalegoon
25th May 2014, 23:23
THIS IS GETTING OUT OF HAND

I do not advocate a civil war.

BUT I DO ADVOCATE that one john hill read "the federalist papers" (36) to understand the 2nd amend.

But I think if I have to read anything I'll read something by james madison rather than than john hill.

Lord Spandex Masher
26th May 2014, 00:13
News reports state that there would have been more deaths had the police not intervened in a timely manner.

But wait, when seconds count the police are...?

Still, didn't see or hear of any law abiding firearm owners helping out either.

500N
26th May 2014, 00:23
LSM

You are an effing idiot.

This is California - gun haters, no concealed carry, aren't any LAFO to help out because the fluffy luvvies deemed it not suitable for California.

So pull your head in and get on the right track.

ruddman
26th May 2014, 00:28
If you 500N could kindly point out where that has ever happened over there?

500N
26th May 2014, 00:31
Plenty of times. And no, I'm not looking them up for you.

Seldomfitforpurpose
26th May 2014, 00:41
Meanwhile it's another quiet night out in.....

3 dead, 1 hurt in shooting at SC oceanfront motel | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/25/3-dead-1-injured-following-shooting-at-oceanfront-motel-in-myrtle-beach-sc/?intcmp=trending)

Seldomfitforpurpose
26th May 2014, 00:43
Plenty of times. And no, I'm not looking them up for you.

Go on, we dare you.

In fact for every 1 you put up I will match it with a bad guy thing :ok:

ruddman
26th May 2014, 00:43
Plenty of times. And no, I'm not looking them up for you.


Like the school children? In the cinema? And so on and so on and so on and so on.

Trying to think of a 'brave' gun holder who while shopping for new runners or dust pan or batteries suddenly pulled out his little hand gun and took on a physo with a AR-15 shooting dead...that's dead....innocent people.


Hmmmm.....

Lord Spandex Masher
26th May 2014, 01:06
LSM

You are an effing idiot.

This is California - gun haters, no concealed carry, aren't any LAFO to help out because the fluffy luvvies deemed it not suitable for California.

So pull your head in and get on the right track.

You might want to check your facts and take some of your own advice before you flash off with more name calling. Remember the rules you agreed to when you signed up to Pprune?

Still, good job that the police were on hand. Even though they were minutes away when seconds count except that they weren't...

gupta
26th May 2014, 01:09
John Williamson, of course, Drover's Boy and And The Band Played Waltzing Matilda.
John, stick to NK

Drover's Boy is Ted Egan, Eric Bogle wrote "And the Band..."

John Hill
26th May 2014, 01:15
Ben There
When the governments of China and Russia capitulated their Security Council seats and vetoes remained intact. Why should we be treated differently?

Neither were overthrown by mass insurrection. You might be treated differently because you choose to treat everyone else differently.

Keef
26th May 2014, 01:16
What do these 36 federalist papers have to do with me apparently not being allowed to carry a Leatherman in England? I still think I'm allowed to.

ExSp33db1rd
26th May 2014, 01:37
Glandalegoon

And that we were building and sending you planes and ships prior to Pearl.Yes, I accept all that, in fact I can remember a Pathe Gazette Newsreel, when I was a child, showing aircraft being pushed,not flown, across the 49th parallel into Canada prior to being delivered to England, something to do with the fact that Congress wouldn't allow war arms to be delivered directly to a combatant nation whilst the USA wasn't at war ? and it certainly was a good thing for UK and Europe that Pearl Harbour ( Harbor ) goaded the USA into positive reaction at last, but I still don't believe it was an altruistic act to protect Europe, finally the USA realised that they themselves were at risk.

What really gets up my nose is the fact that the USA still expects the whole World to indulge in breast-beating and wailing about 9/11 out of all proportion to the size of the disaster relative to the size of disasters that many, many, others have suffered throughout history, you're not the only ones to have lost innocent civilians, join the Club.

That's not to say I am being disrespectful to those lost in 9/11, or that we should not keep the memory of it alive for future generations, just please keep it in perspective, along with the London Blitz, and the Holocaust - and other massacres.

Enjoy your guns, if that keeps you happy.

rh200
26th May 2014, 02:06
finally the USA realised that they themselves were at risk.

Actually its an interestingly valid point. Do you mean the government or the people? The fact is governments have to be able to justify actions relative the size of their costs. So even though the USA senior officials may have known well before hand what was at stake, the people may not have.

What that means if they had entered before hand, then they may not of been able to put the resources and take the measures they did, hence possible not have total victory. Its extremely hard to look back and try and predict different outcomes, theres just to many variables. But we are here today as a result of a particular set of circumstances.

So how does that relate to now, we need to keep in mind actions being taken by various countries, and how they may impact the direction of the world, 10,20, 30, 40 years from now. This is all whilst keeping into account human nature, finance and falls and rises of specific countries and the impact on the system.

con-pilot
26th May 2014, 02:55
finally the USA realised that they themselves were at risk.

At risk of just what pray tell, an invasion?

Hardly. The only country at risk of an invasion at the time of Pearl Harbor was Great Britain, after they lost the war in Europe. The Soviet Union had already been invaded.

BenThere
26th May 2014, 03:02
In fact , an invasion would have provided some fun and distraction from the depression. What a joy it would have been to have been able to plink the hordes of Japanese and German conquerors!

rh200
26th May 2014, 03:20
Actually after all this time, has anyone actually uncovered a serious plan on if and how they could have invaded America?

I would have thought the best bet was to get an established beach head first in somewhere like Canada or Mexico, if they where ever going to have done it.

500N
26th May 2014, 03:30
The US would be a nightmare to invade and conquer. It suffers from
the same issues Australia does.

Large area, extended supply lines, two (or more) coastlines plus
unsecured land borders.

Dushan
26th May 2014, 03:32
And a lot of people "packing".

con-pilot
26th May 2014, 03:36
Actually after all this time, has anyone actually uncovered a serious plan on if and how they could have invaded America?

Okay, thanks a lot, you ask this after happy hour, really. :p

Yes, there was some sort of plan to invade the US by Hitler discovered in the aftermath of Germany's loss of World War Two. I can't remember all the details, actually right now only just a few. But it involved a 'fifth column' start, followed by England surrendering to Germany and Canada allowing German rule. Both impossible in my opinion.

Then if that had happened, Hitler would magically have to come up with a million man army to invade the US.

None of it was possible.

Dushan
26th May 2014, 03:40
None of it was possible.

Never say never when the a Germans are involved. They took a 4 cylinder, air cooled, VW engine and boosted it to 400 hp and called it a Porsche.

BenThere
26th May 2014, 03:43
As of today, I think the first foreign army or invading force to set foot on US soil would be met with withering resistance. What worries me is that the current government might welcome it and the news everyone gets would point out the benefits.

Bushfiva
26th May 2014, 03:50
Canada had Defence Scheme 1 (1921), seizing NW USA in retaliation for a US invasion in the East.


The reality of any modern-day attempt on the US mainland is that the US would crush you, then follow you home to spoil the rest of your day.

500N
26th May 2014, 03:51
"Never say never when the a Germans are involved. They took a 4 cylinder, air cooled, VW engine and boosted it to 400 hp and called it a Porsche."

And on top of that, they had the brains to add ,000 to the existing price with some slick looks and they knew people would buy it, which they did :ok:

glendalegoon
26th May 2014, 04:09
essp33dbird

you might be thinking of the movie, "yank in the raf". you might want to watch it again.

by the way, when Pearl was attacked, we declared war on the imperial japanese and THE GERMANS then declared war on us.

and then there is littleman john hill. still can't read THE FEDERALIST PAPERS TO UNDERSTAND.

Sad little john.

Maybe you can watch, "Green Dolphin Street" and it will make you feel better.


And if England surrendered in WW2, the plan was Canada would surrender to the USA (in name only) and then we would fight together to get England Free.

So much crap on this thread.

And all because we have rights that you don't.

Clare Prop
26th May 2014, 04:19
When this news broke I was with two American musician friends, one black guy from Queens and one white guy from LA, so from very different backgrounds.

They were both saddened but not surprised by this news and are both very anti guns. So let's not tar all Americans with the same brush. My mother is a Virginian and all of my American relatives are anti guns.

As I sat in a bar in peaceful Australia with my two friends and we were able to discuss how most people outside the US just can't "get" the whole second amendment thing I was eternally grateful that my mum married an Englishman and I didn't have to grow up in a country where you have more right to carry a gun than you do to come home alive from school.

Here one media commentator said "How can the USA pretend to be the great bastion of freedom and fairness and opportunity, but stand by and do nothing while their youth are slaughtered in their places of education again and again and again".

As my friends said last night..."Follow the money".

RIP to those people. :(

Hempy
26th May 2014, 05:03
So much crap on this thread.

And all because we have rights that you don't.

Mate, your incessant rantings that the rest of the world are somehow jealous of your 'rights' is doing nothing other than to advertise your room temperature IQ. No one cares that you all have guns, YOU ARE WELCOME TO THEM! Please, wipe out half your population with them for all anyone cares.

We are all just making comment on how fcuked up your country is thats all, and in that regard your opinion is 'expected'. No one really expects Americans to take a good hard look at themselves, you've proven historically incapable.

Please continue with your massacres, it's Darwin at work...

BenThere
26th May 2014, 05:05
Yeah they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles, and they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL7XS_8qgXM

glendalegoon
26th May 2014, 05:21
hempy

at least my room temperature IQ is in F not C.

john hill, when they burned down the white house we also ended up with our national anthem.

tell us john, how many of Her majesty's navy ships has the commonwealth named after americans?

And we were nice enough to name one after Sir Winston Churchill, and after the cruiser Canberra.

you folks really aren't very grateful are you?

Oh, and when your queen had her jubilee, the planes in the flyby, a king air and a dakota (made in USA).

And when we do flybys you see american planes too.

we have so much in common.

ok. fine. we'll do it our way and you can do it your way.

ruddman
26th May 2014, 05:34
Here one media commentator said "How can the USA pretend to be the great bastion of freedom and fairness and opportunity, but stand by and do nothing while their youth are slaughtered in their places of education again and again and again".

Key word. Pretend.

Can't even send your kids to school in a country promoting 'freedom' without them dying.

"Yes folks, we lost a lot of good young people today, some only small children, but on the bright side, and IMPORTANTLY, we can still carry our guns"!!!

"Yay! Yay! Yay for freedom"'!!!!!!!!!


:rolleyes:

glendalegoon
26th May 2014, 05:58
hey 500n, amend to NZ

and does john hill do his homework?

everyone, take a look at this gun massacre and it wasn't even in the USA.

Aramoana massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramoana_massacre)


gee john hill, maybe you don't even know about this.


and ruddman, gee what about the port aurther massacre? and even when guns were banned there was that ruthless fire at a nursing home in 2011.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_mass_murders


Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Too bad they didn't outlaw matches too.