Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Zulu7 on February 11, 2005, 06:38:52 PM
-
Just to see who is not into this "Amerihater Guns are great redneck nonsense". And please no Racists I've found a few in here sadly.
:aok
-
Were you dropped on your head as a child or was it a congenital defect?
-
What the Hell is a Neo Con? And were the Hell is Brum?
-
Neo Con = current right wing faction within US govt. In this context guys who paste Amerihater bull when someone from europe disagrees with their point of view
Brum = ( slang for ) Birmingham UK
OK now
Goodbye I guess you guys don't count.
:)
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Neo Con = current right wing faction within US govt. In this context guys who paste Amerihater bull when someone from europe disagrees with their point of view
Brum = ( slang for ) Birmingham UK
OK now
Goodbye I guess you guys don't count.
:)
Left wing weenie= Current poster from Brit Govt. Who constantly whines about Neo Cons....your right, don't count me in.
I'm glad Churchills not here to see this.
-
Did you ever stop to think that whenever someone from the US disagrees with you here on this BBS you automatically categorize him?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Did you ever stop to think that whenever someone from the US disagrees with you here on this BBS you automatically categorize him?
ROFL!!!
Zulu think??? He will never see he is just as bad or worse then those he stereotypes.
Maybe he will do something stupid on the bike he blathers on about while acting all superior to everyone and rid us of his presence?
-
Well I'm finding out so far that this board is populated mainly by Rightwing americans so far.
Toad maybe disagreeing with me doesn't automaticaly mean you are rightwing Euro hating ( for the sake of it ) numpty. Fair point mate.
And GtoRA2 are you seriously wishing serious injury or death to me for my opinions!?
Come on man be real. This BBs is a bit of fun not real life mate.
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Well I'm finding out so far that this board is populated mainly by Rightwing americans so far.
I disagree..... I would say it is an even split.
-
No that is mostly in jest, and it is not your silly opinions I think that rub me and many posters here the wrong way.
It’s oh so superior attitude.
You have no clue about the people of this board, you just pigeon hole them were you see fit.
-
This BBs is a bit of fun not real life mate.
====
Take a clue from your own observation.
LONDON CALLING!!!!!!
YEARRRRGHHH!!!!!
:rofl
-
No I take them as I find them
I try to present myself with some degree of honour and reasonable language. ( Its called an officers club! ) Now and again I've slipped when provoked a little too hard I admit.
I don't say anything that I don't believe to some extent. ( though occasionaly I do have a bit of a laugh )
In return I have been wished serious injury, called several pretty insulting names and been responded to in some pretty daft ways. Not a very good advert for the OC.
I'm not American,though I don't hate you all as I've been accused by some, I'm proud of my country, and I am concerned about the direction your nation seems to be headed. I think thats fair enough.
As I understand it this is a BBs for players of Aces High 2 not for people who only believe in Gun ownership and the American way is the only right way.
So how about letting us all have our opinions and trying to be a little more open minded. I have conceded when I believe some one has a fair point I don't see that much open mindedness and concession in return. Also I have recently begun to read stuff that I consider downright racist. bearing in mind the 6oth anniversary that the world has just celebrated find that very disturbing.
Now to end. This thread was a tad tounge in cheek. i was just interested to find out who in here wasn't from the usual gun totin America is allways right group.
Is that Ok by you?
-
Zulu, it's like this... There is a clique here that have an "oh so superior" attitude about themselves, but it's not the liberals. The liberals are the openminded ones around here. :)
-
Originally posted by rpm
Zulu, it's like this... There is a clique here that have an "oh so superior" attitude about themselves, but it's not the liberals. The liberals are the openminded ones around here. :)
:rofl
-
Maybe I'll sign you in then :) rpm welcome
-
You are fooling yourself if you think you are open minded, your posts in the gun threads show that very clearly.
Not everyone gets treated bad when they come here. Take a second to think about that.
There are people here who do not have the same views as the majority and they are pretty well respected, Sandy, MT, heck even RPM.
No one has told you that you can't have your views.
Your last line shows just how open minded you are.
But go on and blame everyone else.
-
You got me. I'm not open minded about guns I don't understand the facination for them. But my views seem to have sparked several responses. Isn't responding to posts what keeps a BBs alive? Be pretty dull if we all just posted agreeing with everything Lazs etc said wouldn't it!?
As I see it the gunloving righties are more vocal in here. So why not be vocal for the opposing camp. What exactly is the problem with that? I'm sorry but I think you guys are pretty close minded too as it feels youd rather I shut up and didn't open my mouth. Sorry can't oblidge.
Now its late I got to go to bed. This is the UK remember.
:)
-
hola.
that would be me.
non neo con that is,
though i have no problems with gun ownership personally.
-
Got to count me in the gun owner and advocate group as well. While I don't think everyone should have an AK-47 with them 24/7, I wouldn't mind if they had a one in their house with proper precautions to avoid unauthorized access and use.
Heh, a liberal with firearms and the knowledge to use them. A conservative's Catch-22.
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
So how about letting us all have our opinions and trying to be a little more open minded.
There are some many Euros that appear to have the view that once someone voices an opinon it is some wrong to disagree with said opinion.
No one here can prevent you from posting your opinions. You're SUPPOSED to have your own opinions.
Just as WE are free to post our opinions. And free to disagree with yours.
-
Hey - It may be a little daunting... but if you can withstand being called, basically, a poo-poo head, then yer gonna be alright. If you can't - then yer no good to anyone.
-
Originally posted by rpm
Heh, a liberal with firearms and the knowledge to use them. A conservative's Catch-22.
Wouldn't the Catch-22 be that you aren't allowed to use it? :)
-
Originally posted by Nash
Hey - It may be a little daunting... but if you can withstand being called, basically, a poo-poo head, then yer gonna be alright. If you can't - then yer no good to anyone.
SHADDAP POO-POO HEAD!
-
Shaddup, numbnuts.
See? That's all there is to it! :)
-
Observe:
(http://www.sqi.gu.edu.au/kimages/Animated/Cartoons/itchy_n_scratchy.gif)
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Well I'm finding out so far that this board is populated mainly by Rightwing americans so far.
Probably because compaired to where you are.
Even our left wingers are right wingers
-
That was a fascinating use of punctuation. Just when I start to get comfortable, the envelope gets pushed yet again.
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Nash
That was a fascinating use of punctuation. Just when I start to get comfortable, the envelope gets pushed yet again.
Almost as far as the envelope for creative redefinition of the term "neoconservative"...
-
Oh I KNOW isn't it CRAZY Funked?!
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Just to see who is not into this "Amerihater Guns are great redneck nonsense". And please no Racists I've found a few in here sadly.
:aok
(http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/otn/funny/moon.gif)
-
I've heard that neo-cons now prefer the label 'progressives'
Please respect their choice of verbal definition.
-
poo Poo Head!!!!!! By god how old are we all in here?
Well I thought this one might stir up something but sadly all its stirred up is a load of Poo Poo!
:rofl
-
So Tumor does your a*se icon convey the message that you are fine with the racists then? Or just that you are 10 years old?
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
So Tumor does your a*se icon convey the message that you are fine with the racists then? Or just that you are 10 years old?
(http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/otn/funny/moon.gif)
-
Originally posted by Toad
WE are free to post our opinions. And free to disagree with yours.
Yes, but it's stretching it a bit when you accuse Zulu7 of having a personality disorder - just because he doesn't share your views, which is what you did in his other thread.
Speaking of which, Gtora2 said, in that thread, that he didn't care what Zulu7 thinks - but here he is, yet again, reading one of Zulu's threads.
Zulu, I've been to the USA in every calendar year since 1977 except 2002, and the only gun owners I know of were those I met at the 2003 minicon in CA. I think the whole gun thing is way overplayed on this board. The thing is, I don't like asking folks in America if they have a gun, because most of 'em look at you as if they think you're nuts for asking. One thing I can tell you is that this board, IMO, is certainly NOT representative of the US population as a whole. And I've been to 41 of the 50 states and will be adding two more in April. I just don't naturally rub shoulders with gun types, but Tomato and I enjoyed our day out with Lazs immensely - not just shooting his guns, but "shooting the breeze" afterwards at Lazs's hovel.
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/lt.jpg)
Drediock said Probably because compaired to where you are.
Even our left wingers are right wingers
There's a lot of truth in that. For example, Lazs tells us he votes Republican. Now it's hard to imagine a British equivalent of Lazs ;) and difficult to imagine that if that person existed that he would vote Conservative. The principle also works in reverse. I have a lot of friends in New York, many of them Jewish. I was over there last September for a visit which coincided with the Jewish new year festival of Rosh Hashanah, and was invited to a RH dinner in Tarrytown,NY. I was the only gentile there - lol. On the way there in the car, the conversation had been about the forthcoming presidential election, and everyone including our host (who I had not met before) was planning to vote Democrat. - Not a complete surprise, as NY is strong Dem country. The big surprise came later, when we arrived at the house which I had never seen before. The house was huge, with a very large hall and lounge, separate dining room to mention just three of about eight rooms downstairs. I didn't see the upstairs. Talking to our hostess over dinner, I was further surprised to hear her say that "we're very left wing", and their earlier years had even chosen where to live according to how left wing the place was. Now, if that family and their house could be transported to England, there's no freaking way on this earth that they'd be voting for Tony Blair. That house, in my area (Thames Valley) would be worth about £2m. The stamp duty payable when buying it would buy me a damned nice Mercedes Benz!
Anyhow, it had to be done: I had to ask their views on guns - lol. I had to broach the subject gently, else they'd have thought I was a nutter. Well, I think you can guess the answer. As a matter of fact, none of the people I know in NYC has any interest in guns at all, including a number of female friends who live alone.
Kind regards,
Beet <--- who is as heavily armed as a typical American female car rental telesales agent living in Oklahoma. :lol
-
Thanks Beetle. You are more erudite and wordy than me. But yes I agree this BBs is not representitive of a population. Representitive of the players of this game maybe.
I heartily disagree with Lazs though I appreciate that most of the time he attempts to discuss/argue his position rather than fling insults as others do. his opinion of our country seems a little low though.
I've had enough of the gun thing anyhow. On to more interesting issues I think.
-
hmm... zulu... you seem very arogant and angry to me. You seem to define liberal as I know it. To me the liberal is the person who forms a socialist view based on loving humanity but hateing people... they seem afraid of people and pissed off when they are "betrayed" by the humanity that they are trying to help.. they normally give themselves these rights by dint of self realized extra intelligence and sensitivity not shared by lesser men...
We don't want your help... we don't believe you know what is best for us... if that makes me a neo con then so be it.
As beetle points out... I vote republican... I vote republican when there is a chance a democrat will get in.. I vote livertarian when it will be a republican landslide. I think beetle defines the british conservative... he wants to live in a palatial manner and be part of the "upper class" He wants to limit the rights of the undeserving while doleing out rights to those who pass the class test.. this is exactly what the so called liberals he runs into here want and the way they think... no wonder he is confused. I like people on an individual basis... I pretty much like people but hate the masses. The mass has not personality save a crappy one.
RPM... there is no catch 22 for me... it is you who are caught in the catch 22... you want society to be able to tell people how to act but you want to have your guns and (in all fairness) seem to not be into being a busybody so far as these rights go for the rest of us peasants... When you vote for a simple gun related Or vehicle related (I take it you like Hot Rods) legeslation... you are my friend, or at least, compatriot... When you vote with the women for womenly candidates who would nanny us and take away our rights you are our enemy.
What taints all of our views is simply this... If you vote for a party based on some few things that are very important to you... some rights you want to keep or take away...Then you are sorta left with defending the myriad of other possitions that party takes even if they strike you as too... too. They are still better than the other guys party who will ruin your life on a personal level.
Women don't want me to have guns and Hot Rods.. I don't vote the way the women do.
lazs
-
LOL Lazs! :lol:cool:
-
yep... was fun talking to (at) beetle. I think we are total oppossites. He wants a sense of order in the world with well defined roles for everyone and steps to getting there... a sense of historical class and order and right and wrong with firm guidance from the upper class.
I want chaos and split second decisions and anarchy. I resent any attempt to draw me into the ruling class or any rules they may impose on me.
Back in the day... The guys I grew up with were clubbers... Harley clubbers.. That meant something different in the 70's and 80's... But... because I knew em all from way back and was meaner than they were.. They would "allow" me to be part of their "club"... No friggin thanks.... those guys had more rules and regulations than the cops or the moose lodge. Everything from a dress code to a code of conduct... and... they were less flexible (with each other) than even the cops or the local mormon church.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Neo Con = current right wing faction within US govt. In this context guys who paste Amerihater bull when someone from europe disagrees with their point of view
Wrong. (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp)
"Neoconservatism is the first variant of American conservatism in the past century that is in the "American grain." It is hopeful, not lugubrious; forward-looking, not nostalgic; and its general tone is cheerful, not grim or dyspeptic. Its 20th-century heroes tend to be TR, FDR, and Ronald Reagan. Such Republican and conservative worthies as Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater are politely overlooked.
The steady decline in our democratic culture, sinking to new levels of vulgarity, does unite neocons with traditional conservatives--though not with those libertarian conservatives who are conservative in economics but unmindful of the culture. The upshot is a quite unexpected alliance between neocons, who include a fair proportion of secular intellectuals, and religious traditionalists. They are united on issues concerning the quality of education, the relations of church and state, the regulation of pornography, and the like, all of which they regard as proper candidates for the government's attention. And since the Republican party now has a substantial base among the religious, this gives neocons a certain influence and even power. Because religious conservatism is so feeble in Europe, the neoconservative potential there is correspondingly weak.
AND THEN, of course, there is foreign policy, the area of American politics where neoconservatism has recently been the focus of media attention. First, patriotism is a natural and healthy sentiment and should be encouraged by both private and public institutions. Precisely because we are a nation of immigrants, this is a powerful American sentiment. Second, world government is a terrible idea since it can lead to world tyranny.[/size] International institutions that point to an ultimate world government should be regarded with the deepest suspicion. Third, statesmen should, above all, have the ability to distinguish friends from enemies. This is not as easy as it sounds, as the history of the Cold War revealed. The number of intelligent men who could not count the Soviet Union as an enemy, even though this was its own self-definition, was absolutely astonishing.
[/i]
-
hmm... guess I am a libertarian with neo con leanings.
I pretty much lean toward whoever leaves me alone the most... when they get too powerful I vote for the new guy claiming to get the old guy out of my life.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
hmm... guess I am a libertarian with neo con leanings.
I pretty much lean toward whoever leaves me alone the most... when they get too powerful I vote for the new guy claiming to get the old guy out of my life.
lazs
Now thats tagline material:aok
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Yes, but it's stretching it a bit when you accuse Zulu7 of having a personality disorder - just because he doesn't share your views, which is what you did in his other thread.
[/b]
See how confused you Euros get?
I didn't accuse him of having a personality disorder at all. What I said was his
personality leaves much to be desired
.
Not the same thing at all, old chap.
Further and more importantly, I did not say that because
"just because he doesn't share (my) views". I said it because he posts like a male donkey.
Hope that clears things up.
As for your thumbnail sketch of the US, that's what it is. Reminds me of the blind men examining an elephant. Yes, if you visited my relatives in New Jersey, they'd look at you questioningly if you asked them if they had a gun. If you asked the same question in my part of the country, they'd look at you questioningly too. Only it'd be an entirely different question in their look.
-
Originally posted by Toad
personality leaves much to be desired
- for not sharing your views?
-
No, for his attitude/style of posting.
-
OK, but can you put your hand on your heart and claim that you have never posted like a male donkey? I don't think so. ;)
Originally posted by Toad
Yes, if you visited my relatives in New Jersey, they'd look at you questioningly if you asked them if they had a gun. If you asked the same question in my part of the country, they'd look at you questioningly too. Only it'd be an entirely different question in their look.
I already have - in a telephone conversation with a booking agent working for Dollar Car Rental. She mentioned that she lives in OK - not quite your part of the world, but bordering KS to the north, TX to the south and AR to the east, it sounds like a gun state sandwich to me.
-
Beetle, how do you think I'd come across in asking some Brits if they owned a cricket paddle?
Kind of the same thing with your question posed to average Americans.......just a question we don't hear.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
OK, but can you put your hand on your heart and claim that you have never posted like a male donkey? I don't think so. ;) I
Doesn't really matter what you think. I know I haven't routinely posted with the attitude/style Zulu uses about every time.
As for the rest, you talked to a woman in a city.
-
I do think this board does appear at times to be a very right wing. In fact it pretty much has a balance. It's just that the right wingers are more vocal and they tend to lump all of us so called Euros into the Amerihater camp at times.
I think it's fair to say that there is more of an apparent right wing bias at least in part because of the nature of the Aces High. Essentially it's a wargame and draws in people with an interest in military history and it seems history in general. Plus aviation. Curiously too, their age range is very much at the higher end. Lots of guys in their thirties and forties. There is a disproportionate number of ex or serving military and not surprisingly pilots on this board. Conservatism I think is endemic in both groups.
On guns I changed my opinion on gun control from reading this board particularly from the likes of Lazs and others. It doesn't work very well and only penalizes the law abiding and never stops guns making their way to criminals. On the other hand I agree with some gun control as a way of preventing guns getting to criminals in the first place. Guns, after all are always made by legitimate gun manufacturers who sell them to legitimate gun dealers. At this point some fall into the hands of criminals. That is the real gun problem. Someone is feeding guns to criminals. That needs to be stopped.
Drediock and Beetle said when they both pointed out that a left winger in America is more right wing than typical British or European left wingers. I find Beetle rather conservative but some of the real right wingers practically think he's a commie :lol They also don't get the British sense of humour which I think is funny. Also I think Americans freely express their patriotism whereas we are always a bit suspicious of people like that in our respective countries.
It all makes for a fascinating exchange of opinions which I enjoy.
I think I'd like to meet some of the people on this notice board eventually. I doubt if it would be as fiery as it appears on this board. After all most have a shared interest in military aviation. So we would have something to agree on or at least argue over the relative merits of the F4U or the P51 or the LA7. Although on seconds thoughts the LA7 might start a fight.:aok
-
I'm not a neo con, I'm much more conservative than a neo con. I'm Thomas Jefferson conservative, I'm a constitutionalist, a libertarian. I believe people should be able to carry guns, walk around naked and grow pot.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Doesn't really matter what you think. I know I haven't routinely posted with the attitude/style Zulu uses about every time.
Apples and oranges. You have been here since 1999 and have made more than 10,000 posts. Zulu joined only this month and has made fewer than 200 posts. Clearly he is still getting to know the community. As for the rest, you talked to a woman in a city.
Does this somehow invalidate the conversation? Erm... no. We don't even know if she was in a city, though the chances are she was in some sort of urban settlement when I spoke to her. But you're simply male-donkey-uming if you're saying that she LIVES in a city. Tell ya what - you name any town in any state, and I'll make a phone call to a hotel in that town, tell 'em I'm coming in, and ask them if I'll need a gun. I'll record the conversation and email it to you.
cpxxx - On guns I changed my opinion on gun control from reading this board particularly from the likes of Lazs and others. It doesn't work very well and only penalizes the law abiding and never stops guns making their way to criminals. On the other hand I agree with some gun control as a way of preventing guns getting to criminals in the first place. Guns, after all are always made by legitimate gun manufacturers who sell them to legitimate gun dealers. At this point some fall into the hands of criminals. That is the real gun problem. Someone is feeding guns to criminals. That needs to be stopped.
I agree that there's no problem with the likes of Lazs and Toad having guns, provided that they're kept in a secure safe like the big green one that Lazs has, so that they cannot be stolen. As to the part of your quote that I underlined, you're right of course. But the simple fact of the matter is that for guns to be available to the law abiding (through legitimate gun dealers etc.) there's no way on earth to prevent them from getting into criminal hands as well. That's the problem. The lawmakers of Britain could see how this would all end up back around 1920, and so our gun control legislation targets the supply of guns. The 1920 legislation "sailed through parliament", as the NRA is fond of putting it, because of a minuscule level of legitimate gun ownership. Same thing in Bermuda where Curval lives. Maybe it's not a perfect solution, but it's a damn site better than guns-4-all, as homicide stats from around the world bear witness.
-
I didn't start out posting like a male donkey. I never posted consistently like a male donkey. I rarely post like a male donkey.
Now Zulu on the other hand.........
You could call a hotel in hell itself and the desk clerk would tell you you're going to enjoy your stay. Are you really this nutso in person?
And, of course, if you study the political movements of the 1920's and the changes in politics of nations at that time you'll see the real reason the English had a Firearms Act at that time. Didn't have any thing to do with your lawmakers being prescient about "how all this would end up".
But keep saying that. It makes my case for your understanding of the history of English gun law to any knowledgeable person.
-
Originally posted by Toad
And, of course, if you study the political movements of the 1920's and the changes in politics of nations at that time you'll see the real reason the English had a Firearms Act at that time. Didn't have any thing to do with your lawmakers being prescient about "how all this would end up".
Bullshirt. You're choosing to completely ignore the Blackwell Report, in which gun control legislation was being contemplated as long ago was 1911 - a long time before 1920. In that report, we learn that 6 police officers were shot and killed in the five years 1908-1912, with 92 shot and injured. These crimes were not the actions of any political movement, but of common criminals, many of whom were conscripted to the Armed Forces of the Crown to serve in the Great War by the Military Service Acts. Needless to say, these men were given guns to use in that service, many of which would return to Britain at the end of the war. It's obvious how it would end up to anyone not wearing NRA approved blinkers. But we had the 1920 Firearms Act. And in modern times only two police officers have been shot and killed in a 20 year period. I think that result speaks for itself. In point of fact, one of those officers was killed by a machine gun bullet fired from the Libyan Embassy in London, and the gun used was thus beyond the scope of British gun control legislation, and was probably smuggled out of the country in the diplomatic bag. The other officer who died was shot by an American - a former US Marine.
Time for you to read my sig. again. I don't know how many times you've read it, but it's still not enough. :D
-
Poor Beet.
I thank you again, however.
As I've pointed out, you simply either don't know, don't understand or refuse to accept the history of England's gun control.
This is a perfect example:
Beet: You're choosing to completely ignore the Blackwell Report, in which gun control legislation was being contemplated as long ago was 1911 - a long time before 1920
Here is the actual history:
Sir Ernley Blackwell KCB's Unpublished Home Office Report, marked 'Confidential', made to Christopher Addison MP, HM Minister of Reconstruction, dated 15 November 1918.
Well, there goes your argument of "a long time before 1920". Not to worry, I'm used to it. You just don't know your own history or choose not to accept the obvious.
And what major political upheaval occurred just prior to this report that shook the foundations of government across Europe? Thank you.
Some day, when you learn the actual history of gun control in England perhaps we'll discuss it again.
-
beet.. that is where we differ on the guns thing... I don't care who owns guns so long as they are not too young or insane. I don't care if they are stolen except for myself. I think others should be more careful but that is their decision.
If you would have called rosie odonnel she would have told you she has never seen a gun or had one anywhere around her same for dianne finestiene... they would have been lying. If you ask people in cities that have strict laws against firearms and are paranoid city dwellers besides... they might even lie to you. If you would have asked in my neighborhood you might have found about 80% or so had a gun in the house. Nationwide it is like 60-70 million households. regardless of what your scientific nationwide poll said.
And zulu... here is a thought for you... no matter what it is that you enjoy... if it is the least bit manly.... there is a liberal group out there somewhere seeking to ban it.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Toad
Poor Beet....
Here is the actual history:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sir Ernley Blackwell KCB's Unpublished Home Office Report, marked 'Confidential', made to Christopher Addison MP, HM Minister of Reconstruction, dated 15 November 1918.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, there goes your argument of "a long time before 1920". Not to worry, I'm used to it. You just don't know your own history or choose not to accept the obvious.
It all depends on your frame of reference: For a mayfly, 13 1/2 months is several hundred generations. If you look at the history of the world all 50 million years of human existance is [Carl Sagan voice]in the last few seconds of the last minute before midnite on Dec 31.[/Carl Sagan]
-
I say, no people is better than another. Americans included.
But as a country, US is clearly better than most in terms of income, personal freedoms and general standard of living.
But let's not forget that most Americans today are the descendants of immigrants from Europe. The rest are immigrants or descendants of imigrants from other parts of the world, descendants of slaves brought from Africa, and a minor percentage are descendants of Native Americans. This nation is only 200 years old, and therefore even the notion of an American People is preconceived. Let's wait a thousand years and then there will be grounds for a debate between Europeans and Americans. Cause right now, I see no difference between the two :p
-
I would rather live here. I like large countries with a lot of freedom. I like cheap gass and citizens being the government...This may change. Hope not.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Suave
I'm not a neo con, I'm much more conservative than a neo con. I'm Thomas Jefferson conservative, I'm a constitutionalist, a libertarian. I believe people should be able to carry guns, walk around naked and grow pot.
:aok
:rofl
-
I'm a libertarian too, but unfortunately such governing would work only for smart people. Dumb people would abuse it and turn it into anarchy.
Basically democracy is a libertarian form of government with fail-safe checks against what idiots would do if they had unlimited freedom.
-
One thing that is inherently false about your sig line Beet1e is it doesnt tell the whole story. While your gun related murders have stayed relatively the same for decades, your overall crimerate is going up including murder.
When States like Florida pass thier concealed carry laws it doesnt necessarily mean that overall gun ownership goes up, but overall crimerates go down. Some people who get concealed carry laws purchase a firearm, many others already had one.
Criminals can be compared to predators like wolves, or lions. Predators dont generally kill the healthy prey animals, they go after the sick, the old and the weak. Criminals essentially do the same. Criminals tend to (at least in America) prey on those they believe to be helpless. Concealed carry laws tend to reduce the number of *helpless victims* Many times here in America crimes are thwarted by the mere prescence of a firearm.
What works for us here in America may or may not work elsewhere. For us, statistics prove that when more gun control laws are passed that crime goes up. When gun control laws are relaxed, crime goes down.
The thing that confuses me the most is people who only care about *gun related murders*. Who really cares what method someone is murdered by? Dead is dead, doesnt really matter if you were shot with a pistol, stabbed with a knife, cut into pieces with a chainsaw etc.....dead is still dead and murder is still wrong no matter what method is used. Crime as a whole is what needs to be targetted, not just *gun crime*.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
One thing that is inherently false about your sig line Beet1e is it doesnt tell the whole story. While your gun related murders have stayed relatively the same for decades, your overall crimerate is going up including murder.
Hi Gramps! :) My sig. does not attempt to tell the "full story". Current HTC guidelines for sig length stipulate a sig. not greater than about 3 lines. Nashwan made a statement in another thread some time ago. I thought it was good sig material. Obviously it refers only to gun crime, so you shouldn't try to read into it what isn't there.
Can I ask you to quote your source which led you to the erroneous conclusion that the murder rate in Britain is going up? I should draw your attention to the official Home Office crime report for 2003/2004 - the latest available. The .PDF file which forms this report can be found here (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/hosb1004.pdf). As you will see, on page 78, the murder tally in 2003/2004 is down by 190 (18%) on the previous year. This is largely due to the fact that the 172 murders committed by the serial killer Dr. Harold Shipman over a period of many years came to light in 2002/03 and were therefore recorded by Greater Manchester Police in that year's figures. Even setting aside the Shipman murders, the 2003/04 homicide tally was 2% lower than the previous year. You're still wrong.
Mr. Toad.
History of UK Firearms Legislation: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/cgi-bin/ukparl_hl?DB=ukparl&STEMMER=en&STYLE=s&URL=/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm#muscat_highlighter_first_match
10. There was grave governmental concern about the vast quantities of arms and ammunition available at the end of World War I and a Committee under Sir Ernley Blackwell reviewed the situation both nationally and internationally. There was concern that arms might reach "savage or semi civilised tribesmen in outlying parts of the British Empire" or the "anarchist or intellectual malcontent of the great cities whose weapons are the bomb and the automatic pistol". The Committee met in private and reported in confidence with no outside consultation save with the police. They proposed firearms legislation based, to some extent, on Home Office proposals of 1911 which had been shelved because of perceived parliamentary opposition. The Blackwell Committee recommended more stringent restrictions, proposing that the right to possess firearms be limited to persons holding a certificate.
Blackwell Report, quoted on a gun control website (lol): http://members.aol.com/gunbancon/Frames/1-blackw.htm
The report was indeed submitted on the date you said, but contains references to events and discussions dating back to 1911 - which is what I said.
(2) Grounds for strengthening the Law.-That the control of firearms should be made far more stringent than it is now is a proposition which hardly anyone could be found to question. Attention had been called to the matter in Parliament before the war, and on the 13th of March 1913, a Return was made to the House of Commons of the cases in which firearms had been used against Police Officers in England and Wales in the five years 1908-1912. The Return (Paper 188 of 1913) showed that in these five years 47 cases had occurred, in which 92 Police Officers had been shot at, 6 had been killed and 24 had been injured. In 34 of the 47 cases the weapon used was known to be a revolver or some other kind of pistol. Of the 47 cases 15 occurred in the Metropolitan Police District.
******** In October, 1912, the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis informed the Home Secretary that in the dock strike of that year seven cases had occurred in which men concerned in the strike came into the hands of the Police for using firearms and five others for carrying them though not actually using them; and that ten other cases of the carrying of firearms were known to the Police, although in these no offender had been actually apprehended or summoned. The Commissioner of Police has also furnished us with other figures to show the extent to which firearms were used for criminal purposes, or if not actually used, were at any rate in the possession of persons who came into the hands of police, in the three years 1911-1913 and 1915-1917 respectively. It appears that in the three years 1911-1913, firearms were used in the Metropolitan Police District by 100 persons of British nationality and by 23 aliens; while firearms were found in the possession of British subjects in 76 cases and of aliens in 27 cases. The corresponding figures in the three years 1915-1917 were 42 and 5 as regards the use of firearms by British subjects and aliens, respectively, and 44 and 10 as regards the possession of them. The decline in the latter period as compared with the three years before the war is no doubt due to the restrictions on the purchase of firearms imposed by the Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Act, and the measures taken for the internment of alien enemies during the war; but if firearms can be brought into the country or obtained here with the same ease when peace is concluded as the law at present allows, the numbers may be expected to rise to or above their former level.
******** The returns also show that in nearly half of the cases in which firearms were used, sometimes with fatal effect, in the Metropolitan Police District in the years 1910-17, they appear to have been used without any particular premeditation in the course of ordinary quarrels - in some cases in street-fights - when, but for the offender's possession of a lethal weapon, probably no serious harm would have been done or attempted. In many of these cases the Courts appear to have taken an extremely lenient view of the offence of using firearms; and the question whether it would not be to the interest of public order that more deterrent penalties should be imposed for this offence, even when no serious injury may have been inflicted, and particularly when firearms are used or carried by persons engaged in crime, is one which it seems to us might well be submitted for the consideration of judicial authorities. In any case the Returns show that there is good reason for so altering the law as to make it much more difficult to obtain firearms than it is at present.
Some day, when you learn the actual history of gun control in England perhaps we'll discuss it again. :D
Until then, toodle pip! :cool:
-
Toad how about responding to me with something other than an insult for a change!?
Lazs don't pigeon hole me man. I don't have a thing for guns, and I don't much like the way I see the US going and the way it seems to wan't to tell the world how to live and threatening military force if they don't agree. If that makes me an effeminate F*g in your eyes well you have a pretty limited criteria for such a person. Yes I consider myself a socialst. A bit like those who marched from Jarrow to London to protest about unemployment in the thirties, cracked the heads of Mosely's fascists in cable street, stood on the picket lines during the miners strike, they were socialists too but not effeminate or un manly I think.
So don't assume I'm some ooh everything is wrong and I can right it Liberal t**t because I disagree with US Foreign policy and gun ownership and think the planet needs a bit more looking after than the guy who dives a hummer on the street!
OK?
:cool:
-
Hi Gramps! My sig. does not attempt to tell the "full story". Current HTC guidelines for sig length stipulate a sig. not greater than about 3 lines.
Point taken!! ;)
-
As far as the rest of it Beet1e, I've seen the murder stats for GB. Total numbers of murders have been going up, so are total numbers of crimes. Atm however, I am on climbout from A220 (I think) and am to lazy to go look them up again ;)
-
Well I sure as heck ain't a neocon, but I refuse to be pigeonholed by anyone ... if you are soooo interested look us up in the search engine. I have plenty of posts to help you with your filing system.
-
I've met MT, he makes McCarthy look like Liberace!!
He's a wicked neo-whatever!!
-
Originally posted by Elfie
As far as the rest of it Beet1e, I've seen the murder stats for GB. Total numbers of murders have been going up, so are total numbers of crimes. Atm however, I am on climbout from A220 (I think) and am to lazy to go look them up again ;)
In the land of makebelieve again, huh? Oh OK, have fun. And feel free to ignore official Home Office statistics. :aok
-
Not in the land of make believe Beet1e ;) I believe those figures have been posted on these boards before. I dont really have time to go look for them right now, have to finish getting ready to leave for work.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Not in the land of make believe Beet1e ;) I believe those figures have been posted on these boards before. I dont really have time to go look for them right now, have to finish getting ready to leave for work.
...but you manage to find time to post defamatory and incorrect remarks about Britain on this BBS. Next time perhaps you could hang fire until you can provide the facts to substantiate your allegations.
-
I always browse the boards in the morning before I leave Beet, just dont have time for anything extra this morning :)
-
Opinions are worth something in here, only if you follow the party line. That's not news.
All that is left to do is to try and find the one post that is worth something... it's getting harder every day.
-
True realy saintaw.
I've only been here a while but I'm dissapointed by what I've read already No debate realy just a lot of mudslinging. Think I might resing from officers mess and join the ranks.
-
zulu.. I detest socialists.. I believe women are socialists by nature but do not believe they should be allowed to vote on most things in any case. I find men who are socialists to be particularly repugnant.
Beet.. your crime rate and homicide rate was going down before the latest ban... it then took a trend upward after the ban and is not trending downward.
lazs
-
Must be hard to type... with big wooden club in hand...
-
You mean like one of them cricket paddle thingies that you socialists say are fine for me to defend myself with (so long as I don't use it on the assailant)? Nope... we are a lttle more versed on the use of the proper tool for the job and freedom to use it here in America.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
I've only been here a while but I'm dissapointed by what I've read already No debate realy just a lot of mudslinging.
What, you mean Mr. Toad? Naah, he's OK. He just gets a little testy and goes into mudslinging mode when he's been proved wrong. I can see why you've been noticing it so much lately.
-
Well....being originally from Birmingham, ALABAMA, I guess I was screwed from the git go;)
-
Lazs who do you like? :lol
-
who do I like? probly about 80% of the people I meet. I reserve judgement on those I haven't met. Who do you like? easier... who do you not like? You seem to be very frightened of conservatives and gun owners and automobile drivers and just about everyone.
lazs
-
Beet1e I'm not going to go searching for Britain's crime statistics. I am 99% sure they have been posted on this BBS before. I'll let you search for them :)
-
Lasz No mate not frightened at all. Let me say this simply for you
;) I don't agree with you about stuff.
Ok? That is not the same as being scared of these things. A least not over here.
:aok
-
Originally posted by Stringer
I've met MT, he makes McCarthy look like Liberace!!
He's a wicked neo-whatever!!
Only a wacked out former Celtic wanna-be bean sucker from the "B" would use the word "Wicked"
Pissah!
( I gotta read these boards more often)
:cool:
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
True realy saintaw.
I've only been here a while but I'm dissapointed by what I've read already No debate realy just a lot of mudslinging. Think I might resing from officers mess and join the ranks.
Zulu,, what is the debate you are looking for? A hashing of the nuances and a go at the philoshphical under pinnings to the social political ramifications of the issue in question? That is wonderful in a debate society whilst sipping brandy by the fire. Or is it you want the likes of Toad and Laz to dissect in miniscule detail the foundation of their beleifs so that you can pick and choose a counter reposet to dassel them with your eriudite command of educated ideological nuances?
You seem unwilling to value their driect, honest and hard earned answers to your debating tactics. They are of an age I suspect older than your self to which they have paid the hard won price for their positions in blood, swet, money, hide, lives and just having been there. In essence, it seems you do not respect them for where they have been. You impress me as more interested in turning this forum into a debators MA and become the shane of the fastest opine. I have yet to see mudslinging. Just older men who appear to belive in the convictions of their experince with out a need to dance to your verbal games.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Only a wacked out former Celtic wanna-be bean sucker from the "B" would use the word "Wicked"
Pissah!
( I gotta read these boards more often)
:cool:
LOL!
-
Originally posted by bustr
Zulu,, what is the debate you are looking for? A hashing of the nuances and a go at the philoshphical under pinnings to the social political ramifications of the issue in question? That is wonderful in a debate society whilst sipping brandy by the fire. Or is it you want the likes of Toad and Laz to dissect in miniscule detail the foundation of their beleifs so that you can pick and choose a counter reposet to dassel them with your eriudite command of educated ideological nuances?
You seem unwilling to value their driect, honest and hard earned answers to your debating tactics. They are of an age I suspect older than your self to which they have paid the hard won price for their positions in blood, swet, money, hide, lives and just having been there. In essence, it seems you do not respect them for where they have been. You impress me as more interested in turning this forum into a debators MA and become the shane of the fastest opine. I have yet to see mudslinging. Just older men who appear to belive in the convictions of their experince with out a need to dance to your verbal games.
Oh puhlease. Everyone does it. And the fact that some folks are pushin' sixty doesn't automatically validate their arguments nor move them into a realm outside of reproach. That's essentially what you're saying here, and it's silly.
And you can't dance to games. Music, yes. I prefer 'verbal gymnastics' myself but it's a matter of taste, I suppose. But games they are, and there's not a soul here, be they 15 or 150 years old, that doesn't play. Cut the dude some slack.
-
For Info I'm 38.
Nash I'm in agreement with you.
Theres nowt healthier than an exchange of views. Why not. Thats what goes on in here is it not. All I was saying is that I prefer someone to debate with me rather than type insults or question my manliness or some other such rather mundane and to be honest lame response! Thats all. Is that OK Bustr? :lol
Does that meet your acceptability criteria.
Maybe I should change my avatar to something with horns as I appear to have become the demon in here.
:aok :rolleyes:
-
Zulu,
Your manhood is not the issue. Nor is Nash's. The 2 of you paractice a verbal combat which requires suckers to take the bait. The best ones are like Toad and Laz who will rise to your bait every time with the conviction of thier positions. They think you care about this as they do. You and Nash find them a delightfull entertainment due to how you can keep them riled up whithout ever having to put your real selves at stake on the poker table. The game is your ideology. You 2 make the O'club into a verbal MA. You never share your real lives as Toad and Laz do leveraging their openess in that they beleive you 2 are using the same chips on the table in this game.
I doubt either one of you has the life experience bag of chips they do, just the gaming skills honed by playing the game.
-
Lurk more, newb.
-
Bag of chips? I detect an Oprah watcher amongst us.
-
Beetle,
After the disaster at Dunkirk, which essentially left the British army weaponless, your government mobilized the Home Guard in order to assist in providing a measure of security until the military could rebuild and reorganize.
Care to guess what the Home Guard was armed with? Basically nothing. The small number of privately owned firearms was totally inadequate for the desperate needs of your nation.
American citizens were asked to donate any firearm they could spare so that the British might have some types of weapons until the rearmament effort got up to full steam.
Donate they did, with hundreds of thousands of private firearms being donated for that worthy purpose. These guns were marked with red bands so that they could be identified as American war donations.
Sometimes it does pay to have an armed "militia."
As to the argument that it contributes to violence, I would respond that that is purely a matter of culture. Much of the gun-violence in this country is related to a criminal element and drug-culture that is far more violent than that of Britain.
Switzerland is literally awash in privately owned firearms, since the entire male population is required to complete 3 years of military service, and may be recalled to active duty at any time. These citizen soldiers keep their weapons at home, yet firearm violence in that country is almost unknown.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/lt.jpg)
That looks like a Kimber to me, I could be wrong though.
Zulu7, you are trying to *hit bull****ers here.
If you seem to like playing go and labeling me a Neo-Con, so be it. Sod off for labelling me without even knowing me.
I grew up in a family where I'd have gotten my arse kicked for getting caught with a BB gun, knife etc. I thank god every day for the job my parents did for raising me. Now that I am 31, married, have a 3.5 year son, things change. I have owned my handgun for 5 years now (Heckler & Koch USP .45) and love the sport. It is a way to unwind, my wife enjoys shooting every now and then. For me, trying to get a nice group at 10 yards is a challenge, and requires a skill that I might grasp a hold of in 10 more years. I will raise my son in an environment where he knows I possess a firearm, not hiding it from him. When he gets old enough, with ONLY my supervision, he may be the owner of a Browning Buck Mark or a Ruger "Slabside" .22.
What annoys me most however, are people who have made a DECISION and CHOICE to not arm themselves. They continue to label LAW ABIDING CITIZENS and lump them in with the Criminal portion of Society. The flip side is most "Anti-Gun" sponsors, CANNOT own a firearm, for one reason or another. IMO, you made your choice to not arm yourself, good, now shut the f*** and sit down, and let me enjoy a sport I have started participating with 8 years ago.
Label me what you want, any of you. I wasn't raised in a religious family, just raised to treat others with respect without EXPECTING it in return. I was raised in an environment to respect my elders and peers, and continue to do so. Some of you arrogant SOB's have a RUDE AWAKENING ahead of you at the feet of the Lord. <-----Please don't label my Catholic a** a "Religious Fanatic" :aok
Finally, Lazs, if the wife, kid and I make out to Cali, I'll bring my USP out there and we'll have to shoot a few hundred rounds.
<> all,
Karaya
-
some people have a strange idea of what it means to respect others appearantly.
thats a two way street there sir.
insults do nothing to bolster an arguement. IMHO.
personally, i think that the right to bear arms is fundemental guarantee in this country that should never be tampered with for any reason.
i do however feel that there needs to be a strong and direct grass roots appeal to government and to gun owners of all walks of life to accept that there are most certainly elements of our society which use them for purposes that are hardly within the uses imagined in the constitution.
i think that gun laws need to be strengthened with regards to criminal activity.
you should not be able to commit a crime using deadly force, or even the threat of deadly force and get off light.
point a gun at another human while committing a crime. you should get put in a box for the rest of your natural life.
period.
guns, im my worldview are good for two things.
sport. (target shooting)
defense. (the above helps to that end.)
i am not one for hunting as i believe that it is violent and often cruel. but i think that society will eventually turn that passe' as it has with other things and i do not begrudge my many friends to hunt of thier logic. nor do they mine.
most opposition to guns stems from the violent actions that a small minority of gun holders partake in.
statistically, we leave in a violent society. and so we hear the age old arguement, guns dont kill people. people do. that is true.
i agree that guns are a valuable asset towards ensuring fair and equitable government. protecting our loved ones and our homes is not too much to ask...
but it is up to all of us... gun owners and non gun owners alike to take steps to ensure that there are no extremes that will be tolerated for the sake of the right to ownership.
it is the violent mind of our country. not the weapons that kill.
i hear people talk about guns all of the time...what i really want to talk about is how to keep the guns from going off.
88
-
" it is the violent mind of our country. not the weapons that kill.
i hear people talk about guns all of the time...what i really want to talk about is how to keep the guns from going off."
Fair point there JB88
So Why is America so violent?
Now Bustr as for this statement
"You never share your real lives as Toad and Laz do....."
What exactly would you like to know about me?
I'm 38 ( you can find that on this bbs)
I live in Birmingham (that too)
I 'm a youthworker (oh that too)
I ride a daytona 1200 ( same , on the bbs too )
You can also find out what my father did where I grew up etc etc etc. So I'd say I'm pretty open there wouldn't you?
This is a gaming BBs not a bloody dating site. I don't need to know all about you I just wan't to know your opinion on stuff.
:aok
-
Shuckins!!
After the disaster at Dunkirk, which essentially left the British army weaponless, your government mobilized the Home Guard in order to assist in providing a measure of security until the military could rebuild and reorganize.
Indeed, but it's comical to think that the Home Guard could have fought back the Germans. :lol The BBC would agree with me, and made a long running comedy series about it called Dad's Army (http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/guide/articles/d/dadsarmy_7771975.shtml).
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/guide/images/220/dadsarmy_1.jpg)
Central to the theme of Dad's Army was that Captain Mainwaring believed that his little band of men would be instrumental in repelling a German invasion. :lol
Switzerland is literally awash in privately owned firearms, since the entire male population is required to complete 3 years of military service, and may be recalled to active duty at any time. These citizen soldiers keep their weapons at home, yet firearm violence in that country is almost unknown.
I guess you must have missed the last 99 gun debates! Switzerland is nothing like the US, as it doesn't have a social underclass, immigration, gangs/drugs etc. And their guns are mostly rifles, not hand guns, and therefore not best suited for crime. Britain has all those problems I just listed ^ but does not have a significant problem with guns. A gun crime needs two ingredients: 1) nutjob willing to use a gun to commit a crime; 2) the gun itself. Switzerland may well have lots of #2, but is low on #1. Britain has plenty of #1, but is low on #2. The US has both #1 and #2 in spades. Please print this off and keep it by your PC ready for the next gun thread! Hey, I'll be in your state in April - visiting a friend who is eligible to own a gun but chooses not to. Monticello? I looked on the map - may have to look you up!
Masher, yes I think one of the guns (probably that one) was a Kimber. The .22 was a "Witness" I think Lazs called it. The other semiauto (probably this one) was .45 calibre, but I think Lazs said he had converted it in some way. The third gun was the .44 Magnum.
Originally posted by lazs2
Beet.. your crime rate and homicide rate was going down before the latest ban... it then took a trend upward after the ban and is not trending downward.
Lazs, you brighten up my days! :) When our homicide rate remains static, you claim it's going up, and when your homicide rate goes up, you claim it's going down! :lol
Britain's homicide tally has varied between about 720 in 1991 and closer to 900 in 2002/2003. In 2003/2004, the tally dropped by 18%. The "trend" in 2002/2003 was caused by the 172 murders committed by Dr. Harold Shipman ALL being recorded in that year's figures. Don't forget, our population has increased since 1991 just as yours has. I can't be arsed to research exact details from authoritative sources because you always ignore them anyway. But in point of fact, our gun homicide dropped by 20% in 2003 - from 85 in 2002 to 68. But I suspect this will just be another blip. More data over a longer period of time is needed to perform any meaningful trend analysis.
Despite the fact that your homicide went up between 2000 and 2003, you claim it went down. But the number of homicides rose by 9% in that period, whereas the US Census Bureau reports that population rose by only 4.7%. Refer to our discussion last October on this (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133705&perpage=50&pagenumber=2) page. (Contains actual FBI data, as opposed to Elfie style hearsay)
And the lot of you!!! :D I have never suggested that Americans should be made to give up their guns. I agree the penalties for misuse should be harsh. My stance in these gun debates is summed up in my sig. We have had gun control ever since my grandparents' generation. It passes relatively unopposed because of the extreme minority of people who have any interest in owning a gun.
Basically, when it comes to guns in Britain, most people couldn't give a fork. I enjoyed my day out with Lazs though.
I have never said that guns make people into criminals (except where they're not allowed) but guns do make criminals into much more dangerous criminals.
-
beetle... so your homicide rate has stayed fairly stable or gone up and down with some spikes.
bustr.. I think zulu feels that he is getting me and toad upset but nash is on to us. I feel a little guilty for winding zulu up tho... he is an excitable boy with a lot of set ideas that he has some sort of supprot group for... must hang out with a lot of women I would guess... he seems genuinely befuddled when his ironclad effeminate socialist ideas are not greeted with open arms here.
oh... and that is a kimber custom eclipse .45 and... when I grew up most of the teens had guns in their closet or leaned up against a bedroom wall... we were taught gun safety.
Nash gets it.. he gets wound up once in a while but knows when to retreat. I have met toad and beetle. enjoy talking to them both. Because I find some of a persons vioews assinine does not mean that I can't enjoy the person on other things. Nash can be amusing and informative but zulu.... at least so far... is a waste.
he cries huge alligator tears over how badly he is treated yet... even the first lines of this thread he started are meant to diminish others beliefs.
lazs
-
Well that's very nice, Lazs.
I wonder if you might be interested in joining me in a business venture. I would like to open a chain of Belgian Patisseries. I could open one in Dixon next to that Mexican place, and you could run it for me. :cool:
-
I could recommend you a good 'brussels sprout' dealer if you need to.
-
Liberal Pinheads :rolleyes:
-
I'm conditioned to respond with insolence :rolleyes:
-
Just think what America would be like if we did'nt have liberals. We would still be in the depression. Negroes would still be drinking from seperate water fountains. Over 1/2 of rural residents would be without electricity. There would be no such thing as overtime. The majority of elderly would be without any means of support or healthcare.
See a pattern?
-
And without conservatives, industry would not have built the economy that could go into or recover from depression,
There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible. -- Henry Ford
Negroes would still be slaves, or at least the elimination of slavery would have been delayed, let alone Jim Crow...
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.-- Abraham Lincoln
"If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God." –Abraham Lincoln
and there would be no need for the electrification of rural or urban America.
My main purpose in life is to make enough money to create ever more inventions.... Thomas Edison
-
Originally posted by rpm
Just think what America would be like if we did'nt have liberals. We would still be in the depression. Negroes would still be drinking from seperate water fountains. Over 1/2 of rural residents would be without electricity. There would be no such thing as overtime. The majority of elderly would be without any means of support or healthcare.
See a pattern?
you forgot about sliced bread.
-
Beetle,
I think you missed my point there my man. I wasn't trying to prove that the Home Guard could take on the Wehrmacht. They were never intended to. Their task was to provide security forces.
How much security do you think they could have provided with no weapons? Besides, if memory serves, the weapons that American citizens sent to Britain were used to equip not only the Home Guard but the British Army as well...at least until suitable replacements could be procured to replace those lost at Dunkirk.
However, never underestimate the power of an armed citizenry to resist an invader. Russian partisans inflicted heavy casualties on the Germans and caused serious disruptions in their lines of supply.
In the case of Switzerland, I'd say it matters little what TYPE of weapons they have. Any weapon can be misused by criminal and/or gang elements. True, thugs in the U.S. seldom used rifles or military style weapons in the pursuit of their liveli"hoods."
That proves zilch, nada, nothing. Their weapons of choice are 9mm pistols and shotguns. There are a number of reasons for this. First, they like 9mms because they're considered scary and sexy. Second, they can fire off a number of shots in fast succession. Third, shotguns are used when they're really serious about wasting someone. Lastly, they prefer these two weapons over a rifle because, since most of them are city-boys, they can't shoot worth chit, and these two weapons give them their only hope of actually hitting something.
Finally, there are a number of countries with high gun murder rates in spite of the fact that the citizenry is unarmed. Russia is but one example. Many of the murders committed there are the result of drug and black-market criminals fighting over turf. That same situation accounts for much of the gun violence and murder statistics in the U.S.
As I said, the differences in gun violence rates between countries are often a result of cultural differences.
Let me know when you'll be coming through Arkansas. I'll try to meet you and buy you a steak dinner. Or whatever you prefer.
Just thought I'd warn you though...I'm not nearly as impressive in person as I am on these bbs.
:D
Regards
-
Originally posted by spitfiremkv
I say, no people is better than another. Americans included.
But as a country, US is clearly better than most in terms of income, personal freedoms and general standard of living.
But let's not forget that most Americans today are the descendants of immigrants from Europe. The rest are immigrants or descendants of imigrants from other parts of the world, descendants of slaves brought from Africa, and a minor percentage are descendants of Native Americans. This nation is only 200 years old, and therefore even the notion of an American People is preconceived. Let's wait a thousand years and then there will be grounds for a debate between Europeans and Americans. Cause right now, I see no difference between the two :p
Well I'm descended from Americans, born here. I'm willing to
bet a large majority of Americans were also born to natives, as
it's been a good 60 years since the last major influx from across
the pond.
As far as the 200 year old country thing, the US government
is a great deal older than most European ones. I'm not sure why
we should assume the notion of American People is preconceived.
-
The best dogs are mongrels.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Just thought I'd warn you though...I'm not nearly as impressive in person as I am on these bbs.
:lol
Good post, Shuckins. I mean all of it, not just that last bit that made me laugh. :cool:
Thank you for your kind invitation! Too good to miss. We don't really have any definite plans once having arrived, but we have a week. I can be contacted by email through the BBS. Can you?
-
Blimey this one runs and runs!
And meanders from topic to topic.
:cool:
-
yeah but we don't have to pay $5 a gallon for gasoline or ride sissy little trumpets in the rain and we don't have to say "blimey" or give up our guns or Hot Rods so everything is good.
lazs
-
So Lazs would my Triumph be sissy because its not American?
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
So Lazs would my Triumph be sissy because its not American?
:rofl :rofl :rofl
That would depend on several factors, like how much horsepower does it have, how well does it accelerate and do you measure fuel consumption in miles per gallon or gallons per mile? ;)
-
1200cc Four cylinders of British beef!
147bhp at the crank. Dynoed 125 at the rear wheel. though they only ran it up to 125mph road speed so probably a bit more.
Acceleration never timed it exactly but 0-60 in about 3secs.
Quarter mile in the low 11s
So pretty damn quick compared to a standard Harley tractor!!
Fuel consumption 45mpg but it gets me through traffic much quicker in the city so burns less gas and as a consequence produces less polution than my car.
And its way way more fun. Only bloody expensive supercars have more performance and I'm smiling because my grin only cost me 2000 quid as opposed to 40000 quid! and I'm not sitting in a little tin box.
So If thats sissy well hey Frankly I don't give a damn.
The Eurocrats in the mid 90s tried to ban all bikes of more than 100bhp. Until Triumph bought out the Daytona and the British Govt backing British manufacturers refused to sign up. The whole 100bhp limit idea was a German commisioner's called Bangerman. He lost his job due to corruption charges.
I take great pride in riding a British piece of engineering that fought off a threat to my freedom from a German.
Hang on theres a paralell in aviation there isn't there ;)
(http://www.militaryairshows.net/spits/s96-7350b.jpg)
(http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/7304/daytona.jpg) :lol :lol
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
The Eurocrats in the mid 90s tried to ban all bikes of more than 100bhp.
A neighbour of mine realised a lifelong ambition to own a Harley Davidson at about that time. The damn thing had been detuned by 15%. There was a "restrictor" in the inlet manifold - a diamond shaped thing which resided between the flanges of manifold and carburettor. It was a rhomboid piece of metal with a hole through the middle - put there for no other reason than to reduce performance. With that gone, the "hole" became much bigger.
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
So Lazs would my Triumph be sissy because its not American?
:rofl :rofl :rofl
You have a Triumph?....:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Beetle, you should be able to e-mail me through my bbs profile.
If that doesn't work...let me know, and I'll give you my address.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
weaslesan?
So what do you ride?
Rice rocket?
Yank tractor
or tin box?
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
weaslesan?
So what do you ride?
Rice rocket?
Yank tractor
or tin box?
A Suzuki Hayabusa would shread your "Crotch Rocket" to pieces.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Beetle, you should be able to e-mail me through my bbs profile.
If that doesn't work...let me know, and I'll give you my address.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
Done. Did you get it? If not, your email add. may be stored incorrectly on the BBS.
-
LOL! I love the level of exaggeration used in these dick measuring contest posts. Not "I know of a bike that may be considerably faster than yours", but "A Suzuki Hayabusa would shread your "Crotch Rocket" to pieces. " :lol
-
This is a gaming BBs not a bloody dating site.
Damn... you mean I've been wasting all this time? :(
-
:lol Saintsaw
:lol
Right, on to the erudite mr Masher.
Now then yes a Suzuki Hayabusa would be quicker but then thats because it is only about 5 years old tops, whereas the Daytona is a 12 year old model! That engine development and the pace iof change for you.
Bit like saying my new 911 will kill your old one for dead huh?
So don't be silly. Besides The Daytona is British. I'm British so I prefer to ride a British product. I can phone the factory up the road and ask for the tech dept if I have a problem the dealer or I can't sort. Can't phone Hammatsu too easily.
I'll keep the Daytona thanx.And you can keep the Hayabusa. ( Its pig ugly anyhow )
As for all this mines bigger than yours stuff I don't care.
You could ride a little honda 500 fior all I care if you are a biker then you are ok.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
A Suzuki Hayabusa would shread your "Crotch Rocket" to pieces.
Karaya
I'll stick with 4 wheels, thank you :) (http://www.racingflix.com/getvideo.asp?v=868&p=1)
-
Originally posted by beet1e
LOL! I love the level of exaggeration used in these dick measuring contest posts. Not "I know of a bike that may be considerably faster than yours", but "A Suzuki Hayabusa would shread your "Crotch Rocket" to pieces. " :lol
Beet1e, Zulu is going on about a Triumph. This bike has practically been mentioned in any post, regardless of the topic. Hence my post. Heck, he'd probably post about his Triumph in a "Ripsnort vs Nash thread". The point is drop it already. So yes, the Hayabusa would beat it to shreads. There is no dick measuring contest about it.
Karaya
-
Your loss Indy
;) :aok
-
boosa and about any other jap bike is faster than that trumpet pretender. Thing is... they are all butt ugly.. there is really no difference in the appearance of all those cookie cutter bikes. If you are gonna ride a stupid looking bike with your butt up in the air you are particularly dumb to ride an unreliable slow one like the trumpet... good thing for cell phones so that you can call in all the time.
guys at work bring in super bikes all the time to try to shake up the old guy... I have ridden Harleys with 160 hp at the rear wheel and boosas and 1000 screwedzukis... I have room to squirt em up to 130 or 150 and back down again... they are very fast..
It is not the same kind of fun as a fast car tho. Not the same skills or feel. Point is... I have more fun on an old knucklehead just cruisin if it is bikes and more fun with Hot Rods for cars than some showroom fast car (although they are very fun).
but... in the end... I really don't need lectures about my behavior in regards to dangerous rights and environment from somebody who rides a bike with 3 times the HP it needs, and half the milage per person of an econo box. Hypocracy... thy name is zulu.
lazs
-
Just give me a 1968 Ford Mustang Fastback, that is all I need.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Your loss Indy
;) :aok
Nah, I almost bought a CBR600 for my birthday last year. Too damn dangerous to ride in this town though. I know 2 people that have had car doors opened on them while zipping down the HOV lane on the freeway. Now I'm checking out kart racing, since there's a track about 5 miles from my house that has club races every other weekend.. but now I'm too busy to find the time :(
-
:lol
And out fightin comes Lazs!
Hey mate if I posted saying guns were great, god bless Bush and the USA and Harleys and Hotrods were cool you'd still find reason to argue!
Have you noticed that you accuse me of self righteousness and hypocracy yet in your opinion you however are never wrong. I have never seen you concede a point. Hence my conclusion that you are an argumentative B**tard.
:rofl
-
If you haven't seen me concede a point then you are not paying attention... or... you have confused conceding a point with changing a belief.
For instance... my first real bike was a trumpet pre unit 40 incher that was an ex flat track bike... I was 15 and it was cool... I would ride any old trumpet around town and have a good time.. I wouldn't get caught dead on a jap bike cafe racer pretender like the late model trumpet pretenders.
My beliefs on guns are pretty solid and formed over the years of experiance with em... You don't really expect a bunch of sissy euros who don't have any idea abort say, handguns, to change my beliefes with their missinformed opinions do you?
yet... if you were to ask the real gun fanciers or Hot Rod guys on this board if they thought that I was capable of concedeing points to them they would all say that yes... he concedes points often... you don't see it because... welll...
because you haven't got the faintest idea of what we are talking about.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
Have you noticed that you accuse me of self righteousness and hypocracy yet in your opinion you however are never wrong. I have never seen you concede a point. Hence my conclusion that you are an argumentative B**tard.
:rofl
Zulu, if I recall, one of your hangups was based on the "Personal Attacks"? This is twice you've tripped on a pebble and fallen on your sword.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Zulu7
weaslesan?
So what do you ride?
Rice rocket?
Yank tractor
or tin box?
I have an orange Schwin with a banana seat and sissy bar. :D
How you doing Zulu7 :aok
-
Thats a classic push bike!
:aok
-
I would say that zulu needs to look up the expression "hoisted on his own petard"..
zulu does an adequate job of defending his positions until he gets the urge to type anything.
lazs
-
Eh? Mr Lazs?
:confused:
What are you on about now?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
zulu does an adequate job of defending his positions until he gets the urge to type anything.
lazs
Sig material.
-
Take no notice of 'em, Zulu! Glad to have you on this board.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yeah but we don't have to pay $5 a gallon for gasoline or ride sissy little trumpets in the rain and we don't have to say "blimey" or give up our guns or Hot Rods so everything is good.
lazs
I was wondering, Lazs, why you so often bring up the cost of gasoline. So I did a bit of analysis on our respective fuel costs.
I think you said your cars get about 8mpg. Our gallons are about a quart bigger, so you'd get 10mpg - I get better than 4½ times that but I use diesel. For an imperial gallon we pay $5 - you'd pay about $2. So I'm paying 2½ times as much by volume, but using only 20% as much. So my fuel costs per mile are about half of yours.
And I'd beat you in a race from here to Scotland. I'd be crossing the border, while you would be making your third stop for gas. :lol
-
beetle... I defer to your logic on the gas milage thing. your diesel is indeed more parctical than two of my cars. My Lincoln Town car gets 24 mpg tho and holds 20 gallons... it gets that milage with one or 6 people in it....
soooo... lets see how many people we can get in our respective vehicles and then do a gas milage/cost per capita thing...
or better... just fill up your car while you are here and save a bunch.
There are a lot of really fun cars here that get in the 10-15 mpg range. Probly not so many there eh?
lazs
-
If people filled their cars with people then indeed the car would be fuel efficient. Trouble is most people don't. Every day of the year (exept the snowy ones, though we don't get much of that now thanks to global warming !) I pass loads of the things sitting in traffic buning petrol going nowhere fast with only one occupant two at the most.
So yes lazs in an ideal world cars are more fuel efficient. till then though the bike wins.
-
who cares anyway? I didn't build my cars to be fuel efficient and unless you are lying to yourself you don't ride a bike out of any kind of ecolodgical consideration.
You get your kicks your way and I will get mine my way. I won't be trying to ban your kicks because it costs me money or gets a lot of people maimed or killed tho.
lazs
-
Now did I say I wanted to ban cars? I hope not because thats not what I would do. i might limit their numbers by making it a little prohibitive to own the big SuV in towns .
No I didn't start to ride out of ecological consideration. I rode because it used to be cheaper as a kid to ride a bike than drive.
I ride now because its a real rush but I still think the bike rush currently costs the env less than the car rush. Remember I live in a city as well not out in the wide open spaces of the midwest or some such place. So here my argument carries water maybe not so where you hail from.
-
hmm... limit their numbers by.... "making it a little prohibitive to own the big SuV in towns " how pray tell would you do that and why?
maybe we could limit the numbers of motorcyle deaths and inuries by "limiting" the HP to say.... 25?
Maybe we could "limit" gun injuries and deaths by "making it a little prohibitive to own" them? that's the ticket! make it so expensive and unfun and useless that people will "voluntarily" give up their guns or cars or SUV's or motorcycles or.... whatever the nanny state is villanizing this month.
It's a slippery slope that you and I see in a much different light.
lazs
-
Yeah maybe you're right.
Maybe we should let people make up their own minds.
I still reckon SuVs are bloody daft in towns though. And have shared this opinion with at least two SuV driving colleagues. One who went out and sold theirs after a long chat down the pub about their huge debt and its link to the stupid thing!
:lol
-
I recon that SUV's (for the most part) are pretty "daft" tho myself. But... I don't really care. I don't make the payment or feed em or have to drive em.
Yep... let people make up their own minds... that is the root of the thing.
here... SUV is a little more practical on our roads with our gas prices and lifestyles. I bought a huge Lincoln instead just to get my grand daughter and girlfriend around in as my other two cars are 2 seaters and I need to have a baby seat. In any case... It is not for me to decide what others drive or shoot or do in their own homes out of sight of the animals and children.
lazs
-
Jees it must be Friday. we are agreeing!
:lol
-
I am off today... it is raining and I am too old and lazy to fire up the roadster and get all cold and wet these days...
I have enjoyed chatting and am doing my laundry as we type. In the old days I would have rode the Harley or driven the roadster even tho 400+ hp on wet roads with a 90" wheelbase is touchy... Today I will be happy with the sound of a big block El Camino... if it clears up some I will take a few guns out for a workout.
lazs
-
I think SUVs should be banned because I don't like them and don't see why anyone else should have the right to drive them. Except Lazs, of course. He can have one if he wants.
My previous cleaning lady had a Vauxhall Frontera and was forever crying in her beer about its fuel consumption - 18mpg. Bloody ridiculous thing it was too.
Oh yeah, in case you're wondering - I could do my own cleaning, but it's woman's work. They have smaller feet so they can stand closer to the sink.
Hey Lazs, when did you get that Lincoln? I didn't see it when I was there. What year, and how much did you pay for it? Do you have a pic?
-
Same here Lazs. Chatting virtual sparring thats what this place is for. I'm bored here at work. No youth Club tonight as the kids from the estate will be off in town binge drinking! lol
So I'm off home beating the traffic on my trumpet.
;)
Have a good weekend
-
beet... got a good deal on a used one with 50k on it. 14k out the door. And...
The salesman was a brit. The car sits in the side yard under a carport for weeks at a time except as a toddler mover. I knocked the dinning room wall out since you visited... I can email you picks of both events if you want... I still like driving the big block elky tho. Girlfriend likes the Lincoln a little better...
Have to admit that it was "relaxing" to take a trip in with her to hearst castle a while ago in tho...
Oddly... the baby loves to go in "pappas fast car" and makes vroom vroom noises when she sits in it.
I will wait for her to rach at least 5 or 6 before I let her shoot my guns tho... Oh... she made me a "gun" out of popsicle sticks in daycare.... I was relieved to hear that the daycare teachers though it was amusing rather than the greatest threat to civilization and the human race ever seen.
lazs
-
Lazs,
Yes, I'd like to see your pics. Can you email (orangebeet1e@yahoo.co.uk) them to me?
If your Lincoln sits outside for weeks at a time, do you disconnect the battery?
Hah - Hearst Castle - that the place at St. Simeon? We were going to go there in 2003, but got to the area too late to do it. No big deal - we have plenty of that stuff in Limeyland. Actually the reason we got delayed was because we were visiting some guy in CA who wanted to show us his guns, and afterwards he entertained us at his home and we just couldn't drag ourselves away! ;)
-
will do. I have never had battery problems on cars with sound electrical systems after only a few weeks.
lazs