Author Topic: British police officer shot during riot. (Read 1954 times)

beet1e · « **Reply #60 on:** October 25, 2005, 05:48:53 AM »

J_AB - ah, the old alcohol debate. Big difference. Some people do drink to excess, and some of those suffer health problems later on. None of which has anything to do with the rights and wrongs of guns. The people who die through alcohol abuse made their own choices. People who get shot by a gun (apart from suicides) generally did not choose to die that way, but had that decision made for them by a criminal.

J_A_B · « **Reply #61 on:** October 25, 2005, 05:56:48 AM »

"The people who die through alcohol abuse made their own choices. "

I would say that people killed by drunk drivers didn't get much of a choice--but that's another issue, for another thread. Thanks for the reply.

Again, is there a particular reason why you seem to take the gun issue to heart? Or is it just the nature of the BBS that brings it out?

J_A_B

beet1e · « **Reply #62 on:** October 25, 2005, 06:10:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
I would say that people killed by drunk drivers didn't get much of a choice--but that's another issue, for another thread. Thanks for the reply.

Again, is there a particular reason why you seem to take the gun issue to heart? Or is it just the nature of the BBS that brings it out?

J_A_B

Well, using NRA-style logic, I could say that "alcohol is an inanimate substance. That sealed bottle of whisky in the supermarket bag on the back seat is not going to jump out of the bag, hit the driver on the head and take control of the car, and THEREFORE... alcohol is not the problem." - that NRA logic cracks me up!

As for the gun issue, there are many gun threads on this board - most of them not started by me. When things develop in such a way that living in an armed society is somehow better than the alternative, citizens/subjects etc., well then I'm going to have something to say about it.

I'm just reading a book by Cynthia Lennon, first wife of the late John Lennon. As you may know, John's mother was killed when she was hit by a car being driven by a drunken off duty policeman. Nobody minded though - the cop was wearing a tie.

J_A_B · « **Reply #63 on:** October 25, 2005, 07:00:21 AM »

"When things develop in such a way that living in an armed society is somehow better than the alternative, citizens/subjects etc., well then I'm going to have something to say about it."

There needs to be a distinction between an "armed" society and a violent one.

Violence aside, whether an armed society is "better" depends on your own point of view. There are some advantages regardless. If I lived in your country, I doubt I ever would have had the opportunity to shoot food from my front porch. If I lived in your country, I probably never would have had the opportunity to help build a house from trees I helped cut down myself.

Of course, in an urban environment there are no animals to shoot and no trees to cut down anyway so both guns and chainsaws are useless. Hence why the laws which might make sense in New York or London wouldn't necessarily make sense where I live. I've never been to your country, so when you say guns are essentially useless there I'm inclined to believe it. However, they aren't useless in my neck of the woods.

J_A_B

beet1e · « **Reply #64 on:** October 25, 2005, 07:34:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
Of course, in an urban environment there are no animals to shoot and no trees to cut down anyway so both guns and chainsaws are useless. Hence why the laws which might make sense in New York or London wouldn't necessarily make sense where I live. I've never been to your country, so when you say guns are essentially useless there I'm inclined to believe it. However, they aren't useless in my neck of the woods.

J_A_B

Some people think, because of my views, that I live in a city. I do not. I would describe where I live as semi-rural. Here's a GE pic. My town has about 7000 people, and much of the surrounding area is farmland. Within 12 miles of here, you can shoot pheasant - if you are so inclined.

Curval · « **Reply #65 on:** October 25, 2005, 07:34:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
So Curv and Beet, if you were going to meet Her Majesty the Queen you'd just wear some old jeans and a t-shirt, right?

Some do Toad:

But personally I'd dress for the occassion. The old penguin suit would be appropriate. The added benefit would be that it would be much easier to hide my 12 guage with more than just jeans and a t-shirt.

Of course, the Queen isn't quite as easy a target as birds...especially when she's "packing".

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #66 on:** October 25, 2005, 07:36:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
Well, using NRA-style logic, I could say that "alcohol is an inanimate substance. That sealed bottle of whisky in the supermarket bag on the back seat is not going to jump out of the bag, hit the driver on the head and take control of the car, and THEREFORE... alcohol is not the problem." - that NRA logic cracks me up!

Alcohol isnt the problem. Its how the alohol is used that is the problem.
If you drink responcably then Alohol isnt an issue.

Just as with anything its the people that are the problem.
That Sealed bottle of whiskey isnt going to jump out of the bag,hit the driver in the head and take control of the car.

But the difference between alohol and guns is that alcohol is addictive.
Guns are not.
Which makes Alcohol far more dangerous then guns.
I'd be far more afraid of a drunken man without a gun then a sober man with one.

Toad · « **Reply #67 on:** October 25, 2005, 08:10:11 AM »

It's about respect. Respect for the activity itself, the tradition surrounding that activity, the people who share that activity and yes, the game itself.

It's on the order of the German tradition of Der letzte Biss.

I wouldn't expect Beet to show any respect though.

(BTW, the last I heard, getting a full English shooting outfit from a proper source would run about $2000+. Makes Cabela's seem like a bargain.)

lazs2 · « **Reply #68 on:** October 25, 2005, 08:21:43 AM »

beet... it's simple really... take two countries with about equal freedoms..

one is a tiny broke little island with a tax on tv and $6 a gallon gasoline and crappy weather.

The other is a large country with all sorts of weather and gasoline at a third that with a vibrant economy and lots of cheap goods to buy..

the former country also bans private citizens firearms ownership..

The latter has varied laws on firearms but it is easy enough to live in a part of the country where you can carry allmost any firearm around openly or concealed and allmost no part of the country bans you from having a gun in your house of business...

now... people from the island country come to the other country to live by the thousands but.... not the other way around.

something is not right with the idea that safety is everything.

Curval · « **Reply #69 on:** October 25, 2005, 09:33:35 AM »

lazs you have a very strange idea of what constitutes "broke" and what constitutes a vibrant econmy.

Here's the US debt clock:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

$8,009,571,925,529 right now and growing at an average rate of $1.62 BILLION PER DAY. Once the tally is in from Iraq and all the hurricanes I imagine that figure will jump.

But...if you get to shoot guns, have cheap gas and are fortunate enough to live in a region that has better weather than Britain all is well I suppose.

lazs2 · « **Reply #70 on:** October 25, 2005, 03:00:02 PM »

"But...if you get to shoot guns, have cheap gas and are fortunate enough to live in a region that has better weather than Britain all is well I suppose."

yep... I would agree. And... I can go to the mountains or the beach or desert or just about any type of weather or terrain in about a tank of cheap gas...

life is good.

I just can't figure how any sane MALE would thing that the absense of a freedom is a good thing.

oh well... guess that's why we kicked em out in the first place eh?

lazs

Maverick · « **Reply #71 on:** October 25, 2005, 03:21:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
J The people who die through alcohol abuse made their own choices. .

Actually quite a few die because of alcohol abuse and made no choice about it. They are the ones killed by the actions of the one consuming the alcohol.

Kind of like those who are injured by people who cannot control their actions or impulses.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #72 on:** October 25, 2005, 03:47:24 PM »

Quote

That's exactly what I am saying. You have people on this board who cite the level of gun ownership rights as the yardstick of "freedom" - citizens' rights and all that, and in the same breath try to depict the Euros as "subjects" - when most of 'em don't know the difference anyway. You are quite correct - the issue of being able to own a gun is basically... a nonissue - when measured against other factors.

No. NO NO NO!

Even owning guns does not sway the problems in South Africa. The option to not own a gun has no effect on the option to DIE, GET RAPED, GET CAR JACKED, AND GET AIDS. And those are not understatements.

They are not moving into the UK because it's better. Actually far from it.

They are moving into the UK because it's the easiest.

When your house is on fire, you get the **** out as soon as you can. You don't sit there debating which exit is best.

Curval · « **Reply #73 on:** October 25, 2005, 03:52:56 PM »

But surely owning a gun protects you from all of that?

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #74 on:** October 25, 2005, 04:51:27 PM »

There aren't enough bullets in South Africa to defend yourself from all the criminals.