Rate has doubled?

[wrag]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Umm.. I prefer to cash in from car insurance instead of killing someone over my car.

But thanks for the suggestion.

AND???

If it is your house?, your home?, your family?  Are any of those worth more then the insurance money?

So all your years of effort and dreaming are nothing?  The time you and perhaps your family has spent building, putting in place what you have are nothing.  Those valuable second, minutes, hours, days, months, years, of your life spent in effort for the betterment of you and yours mean NOTHING.  You goals for yourself and family mean NOTHING!

So why do you bother?

Why get a one of a kind item?  Why get an expensive item?  It's not yours anyway.

Be happy you are allowed to make use of things perhaps?

Be happy you are allowed to reside in a location that isn't yours anyway?

Sounds very much to me like you are being told you and what is yours are nothing.

So why do you bother?

"Next to the right of liberty, the right of property is the most important individual right guaranteed by the Constitution and the one which, united with that of personal liberty, has contributed more to the growth of civilization than any other institution established by the human race."
William Howard Taft (1857-1930)
American president


"The generality of men are naturally apt to be swayed by fear rather than reverence, and to refrain from evil rather because of the punishment that it brings than because of its own foulness."
Aristotle (384-322 bc)
Greek philosopher

[wrag]

The more I look at the repsonses within this thread the more I think upon..............

"There are three reasons to own a gun. To protect yourself and your family, to hunt dangerous and delicious animals, and to keep the King of England out of your face." - Krusty the Clown  

hmmmm the words of a clown in a cartoon?  Yet the words kinda make a certain .... sense?  The words kinda make one .............. happy?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

So why do you bother?

Why get a one of a kind item? Why get an expensive item? It's not yours anyway.

Umm.. we do have things called locks in the door you know.
We do have an extremely effective armed police force, too.
About every finn today owns a cellular phone to call them if necessary.

Nobody has ever stolen anything from me ever, or threatened my or my familys safety in any way.

So tell me again, why should I play somekind of a home police or John Rambo? Nobody I know has ever even considered of arming themselves for safety. It's unheard of down here.

Sport shooting, hunting.. now that's a different ballpark. I enjoy occasional shooting myself too. But I don't own a gun.

And if you think that owning a gun makes something yours, you're wrong. It's all taken away from you in death anyway. Which may come sooner than you think if everyone is armed to the teeth.

[lazs2]

ripley... are you saying that a cell phone would be effective against a home invasion?   Would a cell phone in your opinion be enough to stop a rape?  Has anyone in your lilly white country ever been assaulted or raped or murdered and if so....

did they have a cell phone?

My .357 weighs allmost exactly the same as a cell phone and is not much bigger BTW.  (it won't call AAA tho)

lazs

[Momus--]

Originally posted by wrag
The more I look at the repsonses within this thread the more I think upon..............
 

And the more I look at your posts the more I think, why should you care?

Seeing that there are countries with similar levels of gun ownership as you and yet have much lower murder and general crime rates I'm not quite sure why you think you as a nation are qualified to give any advice. If we want to go down that road we can talk to the Canadians or the Swiss.

If and when the public here feel they need arming to counter crime then they will communicate that to their elected representatives and the law will be changed. If you think that the statisically insignificant number of enthusiasts who had to hand in their weapons in 1997 were having any kind of deterrent effect on pre-ban crime levels then you are welcome to provide evidence to suppport that position. I've been waiting for anyone of your ilk here to do so for the last 3 years, and so far nothing.

[Harry]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
In the, Merchant Marine, December 41, 82 attacks on ships are tallied. Only one in the N Atlantic; the Astral a tanker which was sunk on Dec 1.

In January 42, 31 ships lost, about half in the N Atlantic, the first being the General Richard Arnold, a minelayer, on January 8 capsized and sunk.  The next N Atlantic loss was on the Friar Rock on the 13th.

So the inevitable conclusion is that America waited more than two years before going to war against Germany. Germany did declare war on you first, and as a formality you returned the favor. Also Germany attacked America first, you just defended yourselves.


Lazs, we've been over this a long time ago. I live in Nilsenland.

[lazs2]

momus... no one said that the insignificant amount of gun owners had any effect really on crime in limeyland... the laws that make your subjects less able to defend themselves or make defending themselves a crime coupled with disarming them have had an effect..

I also think that your gun owners (oops..former gun owners) do not really feel that they are insignificant...

That is why we have a bill of rights here to keep the likes of you from taking away the rights of the "insignificant".

lazs

[Harry]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
In the, Merchant Marine, December 41, 82 attacks on ships are tallied. Only one in the N Atlantic; the Astral a tanker which was sunk on Dec 1.

In January 42, 31 ships lost, about half in the N Atlantic, the first being the General Richard Arnold, a minelayer, on January 8 capsized and sunk.  The next N Atlantic loss was on the Friar Rock on the 13th.

So the inevitable conclusion is that America waited more than two years before going to war against Germany. Germany did declare war on you first, and as a formality you returned the favor. Also Germany attacked America first, you just defended yourselves.


Lazs, we've been over this a long time ago. I live in Nilsenland.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Harry
So the inevitable conclusion is that America waited more than two years before going to war against Germany.

A few Euro nations fighting a regional conflict is not a world war; no need to join a regional conflict.

[Harry]

Originally posted by Toad
A few Euro nations fighting a regional conflict is not a world war; no need to join a regional conflict.

Yes "regional" is a good description for the British, French and Dutch empires. What a brilliant example of American education.

Edit: However I do agree with you that America had no need to join the war before you were attacked yourselves. Which is why I see no reason for this perceived deep felt gratitude I'm supposed to have for America.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Lazs I don't know anyone who would have got raped or their house burglarized.

We can make a deal.. The first case of something like that happens somewhere nearby, I'll get a magnum 357. You can even recommend me the type.

My uncle has a ruger 357 with a 6" barrell. Sometimes we go out on the sandpit to blow chunks of cans with it.

As a sidethought to lazs.. How free do u think David Koresh and the rest of waco people feel now that they had free access to automatic firearms?

[lasersailor184]

Umm.. we do have things called locks in the door you know.
We do have an extremely effective armed police force, too.
About every finn today owns a cellular phone to call them if necessary.

Ripley, you are aware that you yourself said that the police had some atrocious response times away from the city?

[Toad]

Let's see how that went.

March 7, 1936 - German troops occupy the Rhineland. This violation of a "regional" aspect of the Versailles treaty is ignored by later to be "Allied" powers in Europe. They wait instead.

March 12/13, 1938. - Germany announces 'Anschluss' (union) with Austria. This "regional" occupation of a foreign country ignored by later to be "Allied" powers in Europe. They wait instead.

Oct 15, 1938 - German troops occupy the Sudetenland. This "regional" occupation of a foreign country ignored by later to be "Allied" powers in Europe. They wait instead.

March 15/16, 1939 - Nazis take the rest of Czechoslovakia. This "regional" occupation of a foreign country ignored by later to be "Allied" powers in Europe. They wait instead.

Sept 1, 1939 - Nazis invade Poland. The "allies" FINALLY get involved in a regional conflict with an amazing, devastating new tactic: Sitzkrieg.

Nov 30, 1939 - Soviets attack Finland. The Western European "allies" essentially ignore this "regional" attack and Finland eventually has to turn to the Nazis for War Material.

June 10, 1940 - Norway surrenders to the Nazis, essentially without a fight, thus joining right in and helping the "allied" cause. Norway's contribution is huge, much greather than the US contribution that came over the later years.

[Harry]

And TWO years later when the war has spilled to Russia, Africa, the Middle-East, Asia, Oceania, and the Pacific ... America reluctantly joins the fight after being attacked herself. THANK YOU AMERICA!

[Toad]

Yep, there was overwhelmingly strong sentiment to never get involved in Europe's regional conflicts again after WW1.

We even had laws against it. But I'm sure a Norsk education covered the US Neutrality Acts of 1935-1941.