Why old women need to carry a gun

[beet1e]

Originally posted by lazs2
do you mean the stars and bars?  The confederate flag?

No, but that too. I meant the U.J. Saw that on the backs of cars and thought it odd - in GA.

[scspook]

Beet, typo above. I was naturalised through the Army 1984.  Came here in 1968 on 10 pound immigration lurk. I was 3 at the time. Those were the days when people paid you to travel? Didnt even have to steal anything either heh.

Laz, your opinion of me doesnt concern me in the slightest. Firstly, i'd outshoot you and your 76 year old redneck mates in a heartbeat. Either static or on the move. FYI, I dont have a socialist bone in my body.  Despite that, I have managed to avoid become a redneck knowitall wannabee with some degree of success.

The interesting thing I find about you Laz, is your willing to wave your flag only when it suits you. Yet in the same mouthful of air, your willing to take up arms against it should it ever turn against your radical views.  You need a weapon to protect yourself against an imaginary enemy that you can still call home when it suits your needs.  A bit like being an Atheist all your life and calling for help from god a fraction of a second before being ripped apart by wild dog who remembers you shooting it in the back a few months ago.

[lazs2]

Do they say "mate" in hawaii?

nashwan... blacks murder more whites than whites murder blacks tho since 6% of black murderers kill whites.   even tho as you say... blacks and whites commit about the same amount of homicides, 52% of homicides commited by blacks vs 48% by whites and all other races combined... you would have to admit that the percentages, given population sizes... is extremely disproportionate and scews the U.S. homicide stats.


I would hope that you would also admit that the difference in chance of being murdered between  .000017% per hundred thousand population compared to .00002 or .00003% per 100,000 population is indeed an insignificant amount.

you gave up your rights for nothing and it probly is why your crime rate is so high.

lazs

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by beet1e
How would you know, given that you've never been here, and given that your own education didn't go beyond the 18th century?
 

Assumptions again. What`s to learn besides boring, stuffed up, what eh? All the same same.
  Cricket and tomato bruising. Both sports for the limp of wrist.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Jackal1
Assumptions again. What`s to learn besides boring, stuffed up, what eh? All the same same.
  Cricket and tomato bruising. Both sports for the limp of wrist.

Hah! You're a fine one to talk about sports you know nothing about, played in countries you know nothing about. At least we don't give our sporting events grandiose titles like "World Series" for a game played only in the USA and Toronto. And where I come from, football means football, not a game where the ball is carried 25% of the time, and the other 75% is stoppage time - really exciting game! No assumptions, Jack. You said yourself you'd never been here, besides which your 15th century perception of the British Monarchy and your complete lack of knowledge about European integration since 1957 make it patently obvious.

[Jackal1]

You live there Bruiser, not me. You have to deal with it , not me.
I`d be bored to friggen tears.
I would tell you what has become "patently obvious" about you there hoss, but I would imagine it would get me banned, so you can just use your imagination.................. ..........I mean if you are still allowed to have one.

[lazs2]

speaking of games nashwan... wouldn't you admit that soccer matches are far too dangerous to allow?   Look at all the soccer riots.   Soccer riots kill more than any riot we have ever had here in modern times...    You would be safer in riot zones in the U.S. than at a soccer game during a soccer riot where your law abiding non gun toteing people are.

in our riots... maybe 20-50 will die in a city of over a million... in your soccer riots 150 may die out of maybe 30, 40 thousand or so... I'm not very good at math so maybe you can work that out for me?

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
speaking of games nashwan... wouldn't you admit that soccer matches are far too dangerous to allow?   Look at all the soccer riots.   Soccer riots kill more than any riot we have ever had here in modern times...    You would be safer in riot zones in the U.S. than at a soccer game during a soccer riot where your law abiding non gun toteing people are.

in our riots... maybe 20-50 will die in a city of over a million... in your soccer riots 150 may die out of maybe 30, 40 thousand or so... I'm not very good at math so maybe you can work that out for me?

You're not very good at "facts" either.  Care to provide some backup for those outrageous figures?

[lazs2]

for one... http://www.emergency.com/socrviol.htm

lazs

[Curval]

The deaths mentioned in that article are not related to riots at all.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Jackal1
You live there Bruiser, not me. You have to deal with it , not me.
I`d be bored to friggen tears.

Yeah, I guess you would. Not enough redneck bars. Not enough places serving grits. Not enough steel gitt-tarrzz. Not enough 1950s cars  that get 5-6mpg. And not enough silly hats.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
An old woman is more likely to shoot herself in the hip or a bystander if she tries to fire on a fast moving dog in a panic. The correct solution to the problem is to force the owners of attack dogs / any large canine to leash the dogs when outside or cage them. There's absolutely no reason why an attack dog should be left to run unleashed in a housing enviroment.

News flash, mrripley.  It's already illegal to let your dogs run loose in every jurisdiction I have ever heard of.  Jose didn't care about the law.

Don't take this personally, now.  It's not your fault.

You have been propagandized into believing that the solution to a problem is to make a new law about it.  That crime is prevented by laws.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

The truth is that laws only codify and provide a punishment for a criminal that gets caught.  That's supposed to "deter".  The problem with that idea is that deterrance only works with those that are intimidated by authority.  Criminals--by definition--aren't.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by beet1e
Hah! You're a fine one to talk about sports you know nothing about, played in countries you know nothing about. At least we don't give our sporting events grandiose titles like "World Series" for a game played only in the USA and Toronto. And where I come from, football means football, not a game where the ball is carried 25% of the time, and the other 75% is stoppage time - really exciting game! No assumptions, Jack. You said yourself you'd never been here, besides which your 15th century perception of the British Monarchy and your complete lack of knowledge about European integration since 1957 make it patently obvious.

Jut off the top of my head, here are some other countries that play organized baseball seriously:

Taiwan
The Phillipines
Japan (cricket never caught on there despite their relations with the brits)
Cuba (!)
Puerto Rico
Domincan Republic
Korea
Indonesia

[Holden McGroin]

Fidel Castro was a fairly decent pitcher.

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Fidel Castro was a fairly decent pitcher.

Prolly why brits don't like baseball.... to many catchers.