why do these anti-gun groups bother sometimes?!?

[danielson]

britain made hand-guns illegal after the dunblane incdent, it was an isolated incident, and the grief stricken relatives made a society to outlaw guns....prbably as a way of copig but either way politicians hurried it through like the whores they are

now gun violence is on the up and up, and all the legal law abiding citizens who had them can;t use them any more





and now the SAME groups who did that are now makng moves to get swords and knives made illegal, they are pushing police to create days when weapons can be handed in? WTF?!?....you should hear them speak ''a samurai sword costs less than a pair of trainers''....

what do these (predominantly mothers groups) think they are gonna cook with??

<end rant>

 

[Y_lifter]

Time to whip out your Blow Gun /w Poison darts Dan...

 

[danielson]

they'd end up outlawing them too.....

 

[alien amp pharm]

It's because some people are too stupid to know any better, but yet they are quick to voice their ignorant opinions.

'Hey, why we're at it, let's ban guns in the military. They kill people too!'

Bunch of stupid fucks. (anti-gun peeps)

 

[Silent Method]

Britain: From Bad to Worse
Dave Kopel, Dr. Paul Gallant and Dr. Joanne Eisen
Thursday, March 22, 2001
During the 19th century, and most of the 20th, Britain enjoyed a well-deserved reputation as an unusually safe and crime-free nation, compared to the United States or continental Europe. No longer.
To the great consternation of British authorities concerned about tourism revenue, a June CBS News report proclaimed Great Britain "one of the most violent urban societies in the Western world." Declared Dan Rather: "This summer, thousands of Americans will travel to Britain expecting a civilized island free from crime and ugliness ... [but now] the U.K. has a crime problem ... worse than ours."

Not surprisingly to many observers, the violent crime rate has risen dramatically and steadily since gun bans have been instituted. That's a trend seen wherever strict gun control laws have been implemented. And that's the part of the story British officials have tried to keep under wraps.

A headline in the London Daily Telegraph back on April 1, 1996, said it all: "Crime Figures a Sham, Say Police." The story noted that "pressure to convince the public that police were winning the fight against crime had resulted in a long list of ruses to 'massage' statistics," and "the recorded crime level bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed."

For example, where a series of homes were burgled, they were regularly recorded as one crime. If a burglar hit 15 or 20 flats, only one crime was added to the statistics.

More recently, a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary charges Britain's 43 police departments with systemic under-classification of crime – for example, by recording burglary as "vandalism." The report lays much of the blame on the police's desire to avoid the extra paperwork associated with more serious crimes.

Britain's justice officials have also kept crime totals down by being careful about what to count.

"American homicide rates are based on initial data, but British homicide rates are based on the final disposition." Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. "With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham," the report concludes.

Another "common practice," according to one retired Scotland Yard senior officer, is "falsifying clear-up rates by gaining false confessions from criminals already in prison." (Britain has far fewer protections against abusive police interrogations than does the United States.) As a result, thousands of crimes in Great Britain have been "solved" by bribing or coercing prisoners to confess to crimes they never committed.

Explaining away the disparity between crime reported by victims and the official figures became so difficult that, in April 1998, the British Home Office was forced to change its method of reporting crime, and a somewhat more accurate picture began to emerge. In January 2000, official street-crime rates in London were more than double the official rate from the year before.

So what's a British politician to do when elections coincide with an out-of-control crime wave? Calling for "reasonable" gun laws is no longer an option. Handguns have been confiscated and long guns are very tightly restricted. So anti-gun demagoguery, while still popular, can't carry the entire load.

Conversely, the government would not find it acceptable to allow its subjects to possess any type of gun (even a licensed, registered .22 rifle) for home protection. Defensive gun ownership is entirely illegal, and considered an insult to the government, because it implies that the government cannot keep the peace. Thus, in one recent notorious case, an elderly man who had been repeatedly burglarized and had received no meaningful assistance from the police, shot a pair of career burglars who had broken into his home. The man was sentenced to life in prison.

The British authorities warn the public incessantly about the dangers of following the American path on gun policy. But the Daily Telegraph (June 29, 2000) points out that "the main reason for a much lower burglary rate in America is householders' propensity to shoot intruders. They do so without fear of being dragged before courts and jailed for life."

So what's the government going to do to make voters safer? One solution came from the Home Office in April 1999 in the form of "Anti-Social Behaviour Orders" – special court orders intended to deal with people who cannot be proven to have committed a crime, but whom the police want to restrict anyway. Behaviour Orders can, among other things, prohibit a person from visiting a particular street or premises, set a curfew, or lead to a person's eviction from his home.

Violation of a Behaviour Order can carry a prison sentence of up to five years.

Prime Minister Tony Blair is now proposing that the government be allowed to confine people proactively, based on the fears of their potential danger to society.

American anti-gun lobbyists have long argued that if America followed Britain's lead in severely restricting firearms possession and self-defense, then American crime rates would eventually match Britain's. The lobbyists have also argued that if guns were restricted in America, civil liberties in the U.S. would have the same degree of protection that they have in Britain. The lobbyists are absolutely right.

 

[bwood]

silent...

please post up where you got...

please...

 

[Silent Method]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/3/21/205139.shtml

Here's another that caught my eye.
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/4/29/160327.shtml

If Just One Capable Adult Had Access to a Gun ...
Neal Boortz
Monday, April 29, 2002
Click here for the Social Democratic Party's SECRET PLAN for America after the elections!

By now most of you know about that shooting at a high school in Germany. Thirteen students and adults, including one police officer, were killed by one 19-year-old "gunman."

This event has given the hysteria-based anti-gun crowd a good reason to ratchet up the rhetoric. In fact, even as the shooting was under way, the German Parliament was considering even stronger gun control laws.

Europe is seen by some as some sort of a gun-control utopia. Most of the nations over there have rather strong laws that prevent the private ownership of handguns ... and strict controls on hunting and sport-shooting rifles.

A few years ago British myrmidons handed over about 160,000 handguns to their great government protectors after the British Parliament instituted a virtual ban on private handgun ownership.

So ... just what has happened since Britain instituted the great gun confiscation program? If you are part of the hysterical anti-gun ownership left, you probably think that the gun confiscation made England a safer place in which to live. Well, you would be wrong.

Here are the statistics – statistics I'm sure many of you will just want to totally reject. In the year that followed the great British gun confiscation, homicides committed with firearms rose by almost 90 percent. Armed street robberies went up by over 50 percent.

You do understand why homicide and robbery went up in Britain, don't you? It's because the predators with the illegal guns knew that their victims were less likely to be armed!

I could fill 16 pages here with documentation and information that would illustrate the eagerness with which armed predators descend on populations that have been disarmed, and flee populations where access to guns has become easier.

Take Florida, for instance. When Florida made it easier for private citizens to carry concealed weapons, violent crime rates went down … almost immediately. Murder, armed robbery, muggings … all down.

Predators understood that there was an increased chance that their victims would be armed … so they found another way to obtain money. Some might even have gone to work!

An interesting side note to the Florida situation: Soon after the concealed weapons laws were liberalized in Florida the predators figured out just where they needed to go to find unarmed victims. They started staking out airports!

They would follow tourists recently arrived at Miami International. When they left the airport grounds, the predators would bump their cars, causing them to stop, and then rob them at gunpoint. The predators knew that people traveling by air probably didn't have guns.

Now … that brings us to schools, and the incident in Germany. If you want to take a gun and kill a lot of people, common sense would dictate that you try to pick a place where you will be the only person with a gun!

If you sit down and try to pick one place where you aren't likely to find someone with a gun, you would have to work very hard to come up with a better place than a school! In the U.S. they kick kids out of schools for key chains!

And so it was in that high school in Germany. The shooter knew that nobody in that school would have a gun. Nobody would be in a position to defend themselves. Children and adults were hiding in classrooms, broom closets and offices … just waiting for this kid to come in and shoot them. They had no way to defend themselves.

What if just one adult in that school had had access to a gun? Is it possible that this adult could have taken some action, and lives would have been saved? Impossible, you say? Are you aware that civilians with guns have stopped at least three school shootings in the United States in the past few years? Civilians, not law enforcement officers. How many times a week do you hear me relate stories about private individuals protecting themselves with guns? It happens thousands of times a year.

Let me just leave you with this one question. If, God forbid, you were to hear that an armed student was in your child's school and was shooting people, which scenario would you wish for?

(a) A scenario in which not one adult school staffer had a gun that could be used to protect students; or

(b) A scenario in which one or two adults did have guns and they were using those guns to protect your child's classroom from the shooter.

That's a no-brainer for me. Let teachers and school administrators volunteer for special training and then give them the chance to have access to firearms in schools. To do anything else is to simply invite more tragedy.

Bush Works for Democrats in New Mexico Today

Dubya will be in Albuquerque, N.M., today to introduce his plan for the mandatory inclusion of mental disorders in health care coverage. This is a long-time goal of the Democratic Party.

Democrats know that mandatory mental health coverage will cause insurance premiums to skyrocket. As insurance becomes more expensive, more and more employers will drop coverage – ditto for individuals. With more individuals going without health insurance, the demand for government intervention will increase.

Just what the Democrats want – another excuse to push socialized medicine.

Terrorist Cells in Canada?

Did you happen to catch "60 Minutes" last night? Are you comforted by the report from David Harris, the former chief of strategic planning for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, that there are no fewer than 50 terrorist organizations operating on Canadian soil? Are some of them al-Qaeda? You bet!

It's the Western welfare state gone nuts. Canada will grant resident status to almost anyone who lands in their country and calls themselves a "refugee." No identification? No problem! Just make one up and you're in!

Oh … and you're immediately available for Canada's fancy European-style welfare system.

The border between Canada and the U.S. is over 5,000 miles long … and unguarded.

Now … tell me that Osama bin Laden and his crowd would have a hard time sneaking weapons of mass destruction into this country.

When Do We Stand Up to These Frauds?

I caught a bit on "Face the Nation" yesterday. George Stephanopolous was interviewing some Saudi official about oil, terrorism and bad goatees. At one point George S. asked him about the money that Saudi Arabia was paying to the families of suicide bombers.

The Saudi mouthpiece replied that this could not be considered to be supporting terrorism. It was merely humanitarian assistance to people in need.

That's why they wear those headdresses. They can hide their smirks when they make such asinine statements.

Then we have this from USA Today. It seems that Crown Prince Abdullah wanted to exert some degree of control over American airspace and the FAA while he was flying around the country. It seems that the HTHWIC doesn't want women flight controllers controlling the prince's jet … and no women on the airport tarmac when he arrives.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

britain made hand-guns illegal after the dunblane incdent, it was an isolated incident, and the grief stricken relatives made a society to outlaw guns....prbably as a way of copig but either way politicians hurried it through like the whores they are

now gun violence is on the up and up, and all the legal law abiding citizens who had them can;t use them any more

This post should be copied and mailed to every citizen of the United States.

Pure wisdom.

 

[Code]

We pro-gun people are morons though, we have yet to attack the anti-gun faction....come ON they don't have any guns!!!


It's a no-brainer!!!

 

[TC2]

There're not going to like my new baby then http://www.armalite.com/

Very sweet rifle

 

[Frackal]

Re: Re: why do these anti-gun groups bother sometimes?!?

This post should be copied and mailed to every citizen of the United States.

Pure wisdom.

yep

 

[MP5]

TC2, my AR is coming along nicely! Here is what i have so far:
1. DPMS lower
2. RRA A4 upper
3. A2 stock
4. Accuracy Speaks freefloat handguard
5. Waiting on my DPMS NM barrel 20".

Got an Oly 20" and the fucking thing came rusty new in package! I got pissed and sent it back. My DPMS replacement should be here next week. Going to pull the site and install a picatinny gasblock. Getting a Fobus G-27 grip for it too! Check out www.cmmginc.com

 

[MP5]

Crime is rampant in England
Shira Drissman | South end contributing writer


This winter break I spent 10 days in England. I had a great time. It was quite a cultural experience. People driving on the left side of the road, trying to cross the street without getting killed, strange accents, and video cameras every where you look.

Why the video cameras? It's to help the police. Crime is rampant in England. According to the English newspaper, The Telegraph, violent attacks, sexual offenses and car thefts have all increased.

Crime overall increased 9.3 percent, domestic break-ins rose 7.9 percent, violence against people increased by 19 percent, sexual offences by 18.2 percent, car theft by 3.5 percent, and robberies by 14.5 percent (www.news.telegraph.co.uk, Jan. 1, 2003).

The crazy part of this story is not only the increases in crime across the board, but the fact that "police have been ordered not to bother investigating crimes such as burglary, vandalism and assaults unless evidence pointing to the culprits is easily available" (news.telegraph.co.uk, Jan. 12, 2003).

The police have new guidelines ordering them to focus on "serious" crimes such as murder, rape or hate crimes. Oliver Letwin, Conservative home affairs spokesman stated, "This news will be regarded as the final nail in the coffin of this Government's policy on crime. Instead of zero tolerance it seems that we are to be faced with total tolerance" (news.telegraph.co.uk, Dec. 12, 2002).

What is interesting about all of this is that England has such strict gun laws, that a person is not allowed to own any kind of gun, they are even considering outlawing airguns. One would think that guns are the cause of crime. In other words, more guns equals more crime, the fact is just the opposite.

According to the United Nations, England and Wales have the highest crime rate among the world's leading economies. The report shows that people are more likely to be mugged, houses burglarized, robbed and assaulted in England than in the United States, Germany, Russia, South Africa, or any of the world's 20 largest countries

(news.telegraph.co.uk Jan. 12, 2003).

Even with all its gun control laws in effect gun violence is a major issue for England. Gun ownership was banned in 1996 following a shooting in Dunblane, Perthshire hoping to reduce the amount of guns available to criminals. However the opposite has been proven true. According to England's Internal Home Office Statistics, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993 (news.telegraph.co.uk, Dec. 24, 2002).

Gun control does not control criminals; it only strips law-abiding citizens of the right to defend themselves. Subjects of her Royal Highness are sick and tired of being victims.

In an editorial to The Telegraph Simon Heffer makes my point. He assumed that the people had a contract with the government. The government would protect the citizens from crime. However, "it must, though, be clear that the state has broken that contract, ...The government absolutely lacks the political will to deal with the violation of one of the most fundamental liberties of the people it governs: their right to feel safe in their own homes ... it is time for the government to confer a new right on the people: the right to bear arms. Gun control in this country is in any case a joke" (opinion.telegraph.co.uk Dec. 24, 2002).

We in the United States must learn from others. Gun control is not the answer, it hasn't worked anywhere. We need to learn from our friends in England whose police force is told to focus on "serious" crime. Like the Home Office in England said "The government did not believe that banning handguns by itself would eradicate gun crime" (news.telegraph.co.uk, July 15, 2001).

So by disarming the citizens, what did they believe would happen? It's open season on the man on the street.

 

[Baoh]

Excellent thread. I suddenly feel the urge to buy more weapons.

 

[ariolanine]

The idea of banning anything on an island is retarded.

 

[p0ink]

BRITISH MAJOR JOHN PITCAIRN (Commander of Advance Guard of British forces marching to Concord, MA) "Disperse you rebels; damn you, throw down your arms and disperse." (order to American militiamen at Lexington, 1775)

NAZI LAW (Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons, 11 Nov 1938, German Minister of the Interior): "Those now possessing weapons and ammunition are at once to turn them over to the local police authority. Firearms and ammunition found in a Jew’s possession will be forfeited to the government without compensation.…Whoever willfully or negligently violates the provisions …will be punished with imprisonment and a fine.

FIDEL CASTRO: "Armas para que?" ("Guns, for what?") (Response to a Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns, after Castro announced strict gun control in Cuba)

MAJOR OWENS (U.S. Congressman D-NY): "My bill...establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of handguns." (Congressional Record 10 Nov 93).

DIANE FEINSTEIN (Democrat California Senator, author of "Feinstein Amendment" which became the ’94 gun ban): "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them… ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,’ I would have done it." (60 Minutes episode, CBS) [Sen Feinstein holds a CCP]

BILL CLINTON (42nd President of the United States): "We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans to legitimately own handguns and rifles...that we are unable to think about reality." (USA Today, 11 March 93, pg. 2A)

Reply: "The last time I checked, the Constitution said ‘of the people, by the people and for the people.’ That’s what the Declaration of Independence says." Reuters News Agency

Editors note: actually those words are in neither of those documents, but part of The Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln.

anyone else see the connection here....?

 

[MP5]

Next time an anti-gun nut goes off on firearms, ask them this "would you let your mother defend herself with a gun if she was being raped?"

They never can seem to answer that question. Usually it is "well what are the odds of her getting raped?" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Baoh]

Next time an anti-gun nut goes off on firearms, ask them this "would you let your mother defend herself with a gun if she was being raped?"

They never can seem to answer that question. Usually it is "well what are the odds of her getting raped?" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I got into that with a liberal once. He just kept saying, "She wouldn't be raped." I kept saying, "BUT what if she WAS?!"

Finally, after he kept repeating himself, I asked him for his mother's address. He shut up right quick.

 

[TC2]

TC2, my AR is coming along nicely! Here is what i have so far:
1. DPMS lower
2. RRA A4 upper
3. A2 stock
4. Accuracy Speaks freefloat handguard
5. Waiting on my DPMS NM barrel 20".

Got an Oly 20" and the fucking thing came rusty new in package! I got pissed and sent it back. My DPMS replacement should be here next week. Going to pull the site and install a picatinny gasblock. Getting a Fobus G-27 grip for it too! Check out www.cmmginc.com

Man, most of that stuff is another languge to me.

Sounds cool as shit, but then again you could be talking about some kind of sex android.

 

[Baoh]

Man, most of that stuff is another languge to me.

Sounds cool as shit, but then again you could be talking about some kind of sex android.

A sex gyndroid would be cool as heck, dude.

 

[TC2]

A sex gyndroid would be cool as heck, dude.

Oh, I didn't say that wouldn't be cool, I just don't want to get my hopes up like with that Real Doll fiasco.

 

[skaman607]

I got into that with a liberal once. He just kept saying, "She wouldn't be raped." I kept saying, "BUT what if she WAS?!"

Finally, after he kept repeating himself, I asked him for his mother's address. He shut up right quick.

I'll have to remember that.

 

[manny78]

Danielson: cause these people were thought at a very young age to be unresponsible citizens, so now they assume everyone is similar. You see this on may other things. The Govt. is the only one able to determine what is good and what is wrong. This is the specific pattern of liberal countries.

 

[danielson]

Danielson: cause these people were thought at a very young age to be unresponsible citizens, so now they assume everyone is similar. You see this on may other things. The Govt. is the only one able to determine what is good and what is wrong. This is the specific pattern of liberal countries.

this is what annoys me so much....rght wing parties should have stepped in and talked about civil rights and the realistic outcome of a gun ban, and they didnt. as a result its sooo hard to shoot now, i gave up years ago

and now they are slowly but surely moving in the same way they dd with guns except with knives and swords. which i train with

 

[manny78]

this is what annoys me so much....rght wing parties should have stepped in and talked about civil rights and the realistic outcome of a gun ban, and they didnt. as a result its sooo hard to shoot now, i gave up years ago

and now they are slowly but surely moving in the same way they dd with guns except with knives and swords. which i train with

QUestion: can you guys still have some in your kitchen ? damn that truly sucks....

 

[-SD-]

this is what annoys me so much....rght wing parties should have stepped in and talked about civil rights and the realistic outcome of a gun ban, and they didnt. as a result its sooo hard to shoot now, i gave up years ago

and now they are slowly but surely moving in the same way they dd with guns except with knives and swords. which i train with

You need to move to Texas. This weekend I walked into a gunshow, gave my drivers license to a dealer whom I wanted to buy a handgun from, then bought a Glock .45 caliber pistol and walked out the front door with it. The whole process took about 5 minutes. Beautiful.

 

[danielson]

QUestion: can you guys still have some in your kitchen ? damn that truly sucks....

they havent done it yet....but there was this kind of talk and media coverage leading up to the fireamrs ban....

now every sword attack gets special mention and i;ve been seeing news reports on these little groups and their varius crusades against weapons, drugs etc. the report on TV was EXACTLY the same as the one for guns, it pissed me off (hence the post )

its as if they want us to get shat upon by the criminals....they can't do shit to stop them. alright if you live in a nice area, if your in a ghetto you're fucked!

 

[Sushi X]

i'm a democrat and yet i'm pro secondond ammendment.

here's an idea, let's ban people. guns don't kill people, people kill people. crack don't kill people, people kill themselves by obusing it. so why not ban stupid people. who's with me on this one? we can keep our guns but the stupid people who abuse them will be banned as well. we can send them all to uganda or the sudan.

 

[Testosterone boy]

We pro-gun people are morons though, we have yet to attack the anti-gun faction....come ON they don't have any guns!!!


It's a no-brainer!!!

Thats what I say.


What the hell are they going to use to force my guns away from me?

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

 

[manny78]

i'm a democrat and yet i'm pro secondond ammendment.

here's an idea, let's ban people. guns don't kill people, people kill people. crack don't kill people, people kill themselves by obusing it. so why not ban stupid people. who's with me on this one? we can keep our guns but the stupid people who abuse them will be banned as well. we can send them all to uganda or the sudan.

well just do In Iraq what England did with Australia. Send them there, you'll create a new colony...

 

[Sushi X]

well just do In Iraq what England did with Australia. Send them there, you'll create a new colony...

you'll as in me or you'll as in people in general?