Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: JBA on July 11, 2003, 09:28:31 AM
-
It is true that in the US we own more guns per person 67 per 100 compared to Europe 17 per 100.
But guess who is selling those guns.
I SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED THIS IS SMALL FIRE ARMS NOT MILITARY WEAPONS. SORRY FOR OMITION.
Sources: U.N. Graduate Institute of International Studies (Geneva)
EXPORTS IMPORTS
EUROPEAN U. 42% 30.5%
NORTH AMER 33% 29.6%
NON E. U. 17.4% 17.4%
SOUTH AMER. 5.0% 5.99%
N.E. ASIA 3.1% 4.76%
CENT/SO. ASIA 2.4% 2.93%
MIDDLE EAST 1.7% 2.63%
SUB SAHARA 0.8% 2.32%
S.E. ASIA 0.4% 2.2%
PACIFIC 0.2% 1.65%
-
Clinton?
-
So our friendly Euros, who do not as a general rule arm themselves (something about being more evolved.....), are manufacturing more firearms than the most heavily and well armed civilian populace in the western (aka evolved) world, the US.
No surprize there.
-
Well one can't blame the US for wanting superior imported products for their military - I refer to.
HK 9mm smg - German
MAG 7.62 lmg - Belgium
Beretta 9mm - Italian
AT4 - Swedish I think
SAW 5.56mm - Belgium
M256 120mm - German
M68 105mm - British
Chobham armour - British
-
No surprise where?
That companies like to make money? That "where there's a market, there's a profit"? That capitalism is the cornerstone of Western Democracy i.e. Western Europe? That some Americans find the idea of other people (particularly Europeans) making money through capitalism distasteful?
I'll mark a tick against that last one...
I'm sure those that own the arms manufacturers are not the ones who advocate gun control. Beetle probably isn't on the board of directors for H & K. In fact, European arms manufacturers would dearly love gun control to be lifted across Europe. They probably fund lobbying groups that push for that very ideal.
-
I SHOULD HAVE MENTIONED THIS IS SMALL FIRE ARMS NOT MILITARY WEAPONS. SORRY FOR OMITION.
-
Silly rabbit.
If Europe exports weapons, they are making a profit.
If the United States exports weapons, we're imperialist, Nazi, warlike, babykilling liars.
Get with the program, mate.
-
Typical euro backstabbing double faced smack talking.
-
There's some froth at the corner of your mouth, but at least the knee-jerk reaction is in tip top condition.
-
yep... allmost all semi auto handguns are euro imports. The Colt and Colt clones are still mostly U.S.
I like revolvers tho and the revolver market is dominated by U.S. arms.
I have no roblem with quality euro firearms imports... too bad their own people are deprived of enjoying such qulaity arms.
lazs
-
Excuse me Euro bashers....
But do ya think they would sell em if we didn't buy em?
Since when is capitalism a bad thing?
Do ya think it would be OK for someone from Columbia to be against drug usage in the USA?
-
MT... I certainly am not bashing the euros over it... I commend them and thank em but.... If they all feel that armed citizens is such and evil thing (or at least handguns)then...
selling us firearms is akin to us selling all our cigs and DDT laden pesticides to mexico and central America.
lazs
-
I don't think anybody begrudges them the right to make a profit.
it's the hypocritical "you shouldn't be allowed to own guns. would you like to buy a pistol" attitude that makes the figures somewhat ironic. if the owning of firearms is wrong why would they put more on the market?
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
I don't think anybody begrudges them the right to make a profit.
it's the hypocritical "you shouldn't be allowed to own guns. would you like to buy a pistol" attitude that makes the figures somewhat ironic. if the owning of firearms is wrong why would they put more on the market?
You don't suppose European gun manufacturers are the same ones opposing private ownership of guns, do you?
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
"...somewhat ironic. if the owning of firearms is wrong why would they put more on the market? "
Huh?
What Erlkonig said. The people putting more on the market probably aint the ones who think owning them is wrong.
-
Hmmmm Europe is proliferating weapons of destruction? Invasion time.
-
The people putting more on the market probably aint the ones who think owning them is wrong.
=====
Charge: Using selective reasoning to justify anti-americanism
Verdict: Guilty
Sentance: Self-Retardation
-
Anti-americanism?
European gun manufacturers exporting guns to the US is anti-americanism? Where do you get anti-americanism from here?
-
You don't suppose European gun manufacturers are the same ones opposing private ownership of guns, do you?
I made that point at the top of the thread. :)
The people putting more on the market probably aint the ones who think owning them is wrong.
=====
Charge: Using selective reasoning to justify anti-americanism
Verdict: Guilty
Sentance: Self-Retardation
Europeans selling guns is anti-American?
-
Well... the euro gun manufactures are being hypocrites if they are not fighting for the gawd given right to keep and bear arms in their own countries as well as ours.
The euros themselves are hypocrites for letting them manufacture and export those firearms while crying like babies about firearms missuse in the U.S.
The U.N. is hypocritical (big surprise) by not intervening...
the anti gun euros posting on this board are laughable since not a one has ever decried the manufacture and export of these weapons... only what the "gangstas" in the U.S. do with em.
lazs
-
The right to own a personal firearm is American. It represents freedom, for the common man to own a firearm.
Europeans don't understand what freedom is. They have served kings mostly under a feudal system for hundreds of years.
It will take some time for them to become adjusted to the concept of freedom.
Les
-
I got this in the e-mail the other day and thought it interesting. I have no clue if any of it is accurate though. This thread seems like a good place to post it just for fun:
> Think about this:
> a. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.
> b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000.
> c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171. (US Dept. of Health & Human Services)
> Then think about this:
> a. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.
> b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year is 1,500.
> c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner .0000188.Statistically,
> doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
> FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
> Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand.
> As a public health measure, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.
-
Originally posted by Leslie
The right to own a personal firearm is American. It represents freedom, for the common man to own a firearm.
Europeans don't understand what freedom is. They have served kings mostly under a feudal system for hundreds of years.
It will take some time for them to become adjusted to the concept of freedom.
Les
What a load of bollocks. You don't know what you're talking about. Some European countries have a monarchy, some do not. France does not, and hasn't had for more than 150 years. Italy does not. Germany does not. Greece does not. Finland does not. Austria does not. Portugal does not. I could go on, but I think you get the point. Britain has not had a King in my lifetime. The feudal system was something I learned about in history class, and died out about 300 years ago.
No gun here, but I have never needed nor wanted one. I would not want to live in a society where I felt compelled to protect myself with a gun. And I do not need to here. Now THAT is freedom. Nor for me sleeping with a loaded .44 Mag under the pillow. Yep, I feel free.
Even Lazs felt "as safe as at a church bingo night" unarmed in a rough area of London, and yet feels the need to arm himself within the "safety" of his own residence. Go figure...
The right to own a personal firearm is American.
Bullcrap. Other countries also allow the "freedom" of personal firearms - Iraq, for example. Also dangerous countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe.
This post is so out of whack with fact that I am compelled to dismiss it as a troll.
Oh, and there's no such thing as "God". Neat concept though...
-
Originally posted by beet1e
What a load of bollocks. You don't know what you're talking about. Some European countries have a monarchy, some do not. France does not, and hasn't had for more than 150 years. Italy does not. Germany does not. Greece does not. Finland does not. Austria does not. Portugal does not. I could go on, but I think you get the point. Britain has not had a King in my lifetime. The feudal system was something I learned about in history class, and died out about 300 years ago.
No gun here, but I have never needed nor wanted one. I would not want to live in a society where I felt compelled to protect myself with a gun. And I do not need to here. Now THAT is freedom. Nor for me sleeping with a loaded .44 Mag under the pillow. Yep, I feel free.
Even Lazs felt "as safe as at a church bingo night" unarmed in a rough area of London, and yet feels the need to arm himself within the "safety" of his own residence. Go figure...
Bullcrap. Other countries also allow the "freedom" of personal firearms - Iraq, for example. Also dangerous countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe.
This post is so out of whack with fact that I am compelled to dismiss it as a troll.
Oh, and there's no such thing as "God". Neat concept though...
No argument on the fuedal society thing.
I do take offense to the notion American's feel the need to OWN arms for nothing more that self defense. You are missing the entire point I think. I own them because I can..because I feel its a right handed down to me by indiv's before me. I feel its a mixed bag of sorts...good and bad but it is a FREEDOM WE AMERICANS ENJOY. Most people who own firearms at least in the Rural America simply do it because its part of our way of life. We hunt with them... plink w/them etc. We're prob the majority of the gun owners out there. WE dont do the drive bys...or contibute to the indiv's in the inner city shooting one another over a bag of crack.
At least not in rural Va...
As far as you living here or desiring to... who cares. If your happy w/your way of life where you are..enjoy it. I simply have no clue why you feel the need to try and preach your views to us here in America.
As far as God is concerned.... prove to me he DOESNT exist please. You have about as much of a chance of proven he DOES exist. I quess it would depend on what you define GOD as being then again as well. Just remember... your entire preception of the "world" about you is limited by the senses bestowed on you vie nature or "God". Just because an Amoba doesnt know your looking down on it..doesnt mean you dont exist..correct?
-
I for one don't want to live in a country where the only power is in the hands of he Military and the Police. That's happend so many times before. The Nazi's and the Commminst's had very effective 'gun control' (they had them all).
We in the USA are trying to make a stand for the right of the individual to control his own fate without the help of the 'Goverment', and it's not an easy fight. Europe is lost, but we are still holding on to that ideal that the goverment is 'for the People, by the People, and of the People.'
-
IMHO not enough Americans own guns.
-
"Do ya think it would be OK for someone from Columbia to be against drug usage in the USA?"
Firstoff, its spelled COLOMBIA.
Second, you have one such person right here. ME.
The problem is 2 sided. One consumes and pays exhorbitant sums of money for that crap, the other one has a massive mafia that takes said money to fund a private army to protect the ILLEGAL 'crops' and keeps the populace and government paralyzed with bribes, kidnappings, assassinations and general acts of terror... and also takes care of processing and distribution. Its that profitable a bussiness. But it is NOT legal as Firearms manufacture. You cant possibly put the ELN/FARC/Drug Cartels in the same light as a legit company like Berretta or H&K.
Just like you cant generalize an entire population by saying 'someone'. Only the few, elite criminals managing and (being the only ones that) profit from said drug trade are the ones that are would not like to see a drug free usa/world. The rest of us are fed up, tired and disgusted with the whole schmoodle.
-
Batdog - the purpose of my post was to point out that Les's post was mostly BS - full of errors, written by someone who has no clue about Europe. See what GScholz said later about owning weapons in Europe. We can if we want. I can own guns for use at a gun club, or own a shotgun etc. Plenty of people go hunting (mostly pheasants or grouse) in the countryside in my immediate vicinity. I don't know precisely what my firearms ownership rights are. I care as much (or as little) about that as you care about what I think of living in the US. BTW, I lived in CA - and could have stayed indefinitely. But... naaaah.
I think what pisses me off the most in these posts is the way some Americans crow about their 2nd amendment, and their "freedom" to own guns like it's some form of noodle extension. It's about as impressive as the "freedom" to own an electrically powered concrete mixer, or the "freedom" to own a microwave oven. Who gives a s**t? But some Americans seize on this because clearly they can buy more different types of weapon than most other parts of the world. But then they turn it into a pissing contest. "My country's better than yours because I can buy a machine gun" etc. And then the country bashing starts, and the dental "jokes" get trotted out... I don't hate America, but as time goes by and I read more and more idiotic posts like the above, it becomes more and more clear why so many people do.
The God thing is off topic, but the burden of proof would be on you. Not entering into a debate because I'm not interested in the motion, or the outcome of any such debate. Think FIRST amendment - any - or none at all.
Otto - the notion of an organised citizens' revolt by Americans armed with handguns or even assault weapons, against your own military, is as outmoded as the feudal system. And equally laughable. But dream on if it pleases you.
-
Originally posted by Puke
I got this in the e-mail the other day and thought it interesting. I have no clue if any of it is accurate though. This thread seems like a good place to post it just for fun:
> Think about this:
> a. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.
> b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000.
> c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171. (US Dept. of Health & Human Services)
> Then think about this:
> a. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.
> b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year is 1,500.
> c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner .0000188.Statistically,
> doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
> FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
> Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand.
> As a public health measure, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.
Porked reasonning ... and BS
REdo the stat with this :
Number of death deliberatly provoked by physicians ?
Number of death deliberatly provoked by gun owner ?
-
I think Rude and I are going to take a few of my shotguns out and bust some clay birds this evening. Rude hasn't shot in a long time and wants to reinvestigate it as recreation.
Just for the pure fun of it..... a feeling sorta like vultching for those who don't or can't indulge. Those stupid clays just keep reupping.
We won't have to ask anyone's permission, won't have to "check the guns out of the local club", won't have to have anything but the desire to do so.
I like it that way.
I'm glad it IS that way.
Doesn't bother me in the least if you don't agree.
;)
-
As someone peering over the hedge, well pond anyway and having come from a VERY violent, crime ridden society - ie South Africa and now living in the UK I feel much safer in a country where gun ownership is strictly controlled to the extent it is mostly illegal.
Having said that if American's wish to arm themselves to the teeth against whatever threat they feel is out there, ie their own gov, next door neighbour or the blob from Mars then good luck to them - it doesn't have anything to do with me, doesn't effect me and I couldn't care less.
If I lived in the US then it would be different - since it would effect me I'd say ALL hand guns and ALL automatic weapons should be banned and made illegal, shotguns and bolt action rifles are fine, course the old founding father's wanted everyone to have single shot, black powder flintlocks - which if made mandatory today would be way cool! Those Kentucky rifles are awesome but difficult to hold up a bank ( concealment) attack co-workers or arrange a school massacre with. Drive by shootings would be tough and you'd actually need some training and skill to use it effectively.
-
beetle... yes it is a lot like the freedom to own a microwave... or a.... TV set.... without restrictions that could land you in jail. Oh, and beetle... the reason I felt safe in London wasn't the lack of firearms... I found it hard to be frightened by whitebread punkers with effeminate accents was all. And... I wasn't a woman or a cripple and didn't have a purse to be snatched. I was living in a Hotel where they (hopefully) don't have the "burglars rights laws" if I lived in a house I would worry about the friggin london junkies that will break into the house day or night... I WOULD worry more about your wimpy government that would punish ME for shooting the dirtbag tho.
scholtz... yes that is better but... not good enough. I think poor people and people who don't like organized sports should have some gun rights too. I like to just go out to the country and plink away at stuff... I like to have a variety of handguns at my home and I like to reload ammo for them. I can do this cheaply and without a lot of restrictions in the U.S.
lazs
-
shade... no... the founding fathers wanted everyone to have the latest military weapons or... any weapon they wanted. They specificaly said that the people were to be armed with modern weapons in good state of repair. At the time that was flintlock black powder single shots. Now it is semi and fully automatic weapons of all types.
In South Africa you needed weapons for the same reasons we do. you had some racial conflict. we have some porous borders and racial conflict.. In london the bobbies are wearing bulletproof vests and have fully automatic weapons in their trunk (boot). Canada is having the same problems as the U.S. withj third worlders taking over cities. so long as england keeps out the third worlders they can live in their fantasy land... sorta like japan.
lazs
-
Originally posted by GScholz
... You do however need to have a reason to own these guns.
Gun control in Norway (unlike in the US) is not about prohibiting people from owning and enjoying the use of firearms, but to ensure that you are qualified to use the weapon safely, that you have a need for the weapon, and that the weapon is stored safely to prevent theft.
GS, old buddy!
How ya doin?
I can surely see the benefit of knowing how to use one safely, and how to store it safely. I personally have known people shot with "unloaded" guns and I know of lots of people accidentally shot.
But what I have a problem with understanding is that if some other entity, government panel, or whatever, gets to decide if you "need" a gun, how is that freedom? I guess that's the difference then. In the U.S., we don't think we should have to explain to the government why we wahnt, let alone need, a gun. Although I personally don't own any weapons, I have in the past enjoyed hunting, and target shoorting. I got an Expert Pistol rating in the Navy first time on the course. But, it is purely MY CHOICE as to whether or not I own a gun. Nobody, and especially the government, gets to decide if my reasons for owning a gun are sufficient. That's freedom. Norway's system, no matter how you choose to benevolently describe it, is gun control, and is blatantly against our constitution.
:D
-
shade... no... the founding fathers wanted everyone to have the latest military weapons or... any weapon they wanted. They specificaly said that the people were to be armed with modern weapons in good state of repair. At the time that was flintlock black powder single shots. Now it is semi and fully automatic weapons of all types.
Modern weapons also covers nuclear, biological and chemical. Good luck trying to exercise your right to keep and bear those.
-
Arms
In Colonial times "arms" usually meant weapons that could be carried. This included knives, swords, rifles and pistols. Dictionaries of the time had a separate definition for "ordinance" (as it was spelled then) meaning cannon. Any hand held, non-ordnance type weapons, are theoretically constitutionally protected. Obviously nuclear weapons, tanks, rockets, fighter planes, and submarines are not.
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html
I think that's the generally accepted meaning of "arms".
-
A more detailed essay here:
The Right to Keep and Bear . . . What? (http://www.cga94.com/contributors/stuff/arms/ii.htm)
BTW, is it already time for another gun control fun-fest? Man, time flies!
-
Surely, we can come up with reasonable limits on the right to keep and bear arms. To impose these restrictions correctly and legitimately, we would need to enact a Twenty-Eighth Amendment that fleshes out the Second. Perhaps we could limit the right to keep and bear arms to those weapons with destructive power equivalent to the best heavy weapons of the late Eighteenth or early Nineteenth Centuries. This would permit citizens to arm themselves, but not with weapons so capable of killing vast numbers of other people that the risk would outweigh the benefit. This framework might draw the outer boundary at, say, a mid-size howitzer, a backpack sized flamethrower, a shoulder-launched surface-to-air missile, or an anti-tank mine. Such weapons are destructive, to be sure, yet still comparable to the power wielded by a militiaman of two hundred years ago, standing behind an artillery piece or on the bridge of a privateer's ship, firing at a crowded enemy troop vessel. Therefore, these weapons should be suitable for private ownership.
WTF
-
You've got to admit that Erlkonig's quote is pretty funny.
-
I think that's the generally accepted meaning of "arms".
Toad, from the second link you posted:
"Great Britain ought not to complain: for, since the date of the order forbidding that any of the belligerent powers should equip themselves in our ports with our arms, these two cannon are all that have escaped the vigilance of our officers, on the part of their enemies."
Thomas Jefferson
"It seems fairly clear that the Founders and their informed contemporaries understood the term "arms" to be synonymous with what we call "weapons." They did not use that overarching meaning at all times, sometimes referring to particular types of weapons like small arms as simply "arms." But the Founders' generation were certainly willing to apply the term to more powerful and traditionally "military-only" weapons. This is evident in the writings that prove they thought it very important to have an armed populace capable of resisting foreign invasion and domestic tyranny alike."
"If we take a textualist approach to interpreting the Constitution, we find that all military weapons are considered "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment. Although recognizing the keeping and bearing of arms as a fundamental individual right can rein in judges intent on eroding our constitutional freedoms, it also causes huge problems if we let the right run wild."
The thrust of that article is that even nukes are allowed by the second amendment, but:
" I think the preamble supports the idea that we the people can rein in someone's claim to a "right" if that right presents enough of a threat to our domestic tranquility, and if the general welfare of our people is in enough danger. The danger posed by powerful weapons controlled by incompetent, careless, or malevolent individuals obviously qualifies."
In other words, the only difference between your "freedoms" and ours as far as guns go is a measure of degree.
-
Arms
In Colonial times "arms" usually meant weapons that could be carried. This included knives, swords, rifles and pistols. Dictionaries of the time had a separate definition for "ordinance" (as it was spelled then) meaning cannon. Any hand held, non-ordnance type weapons, are theoretically constitutionally protected. Obviously nuclear weapons, tanks, rockets, fighter planes, and submarines are not.
To bad they don't use this definition to restrict gun owner to one shot black powder gun with muzzle reload :p
-
What are those percentages of? Doesn't really say much.
And where are the exports going too? Does the sale of a gun from Germany to England get classed as an internal EU sale or an 'export'.
-
Almost every country in the world make one sort of weapon or another.
This is the biggest pile of crap ive ever heard. If you americans decided to buy YOUR OWN guns then there wouldnt be this statistic would there?
The point that we (europeans) CHOOSE not to arm ourselves and you CHOOSE to buy a german or french weapon rather than an american one has no bearing on anything other than which company makes some money.
I really want to know what the poiint of this rediculous post is.
are you saying its hypocritical of europeans to sell firearms?
are you saying its our fault theres so many guns in the USA?
are you saying we should arm ourselves as well ?
oh btw I dont care if US citizens own guns. I merely like the way it is in the UK where im not likely to be shot by a drunk neighbour. I dont want a gun and as i live in the UK thats pretty lucky isnt it. If i lived in the US I'd buy one for protection and maybe hunting or sport shooting but thats only because in that society its the norm. Whats wrong with not wanting a gun when you live in a country where they just arent that common?
If you took 2 mintes to think about weapons you would know for one thing its the people who kill not the weapons alone. If someone wants to live in a place where there is less chance of getting shot then they go to a country with less people who own guns or they just try to avoid them if they are there.
I dont think ive ever seen a more poinless statistic than the one at the top of this thread in my life.
so what if countries manufacture weapons? so what if they sell them to the US? the country allows its people to have them so its no crime is it.
Perhaps we should find out how many AMERICAN made firearms make their way illegally to countries where owning them IS illegal eh? that would be a statistic that actually means something.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
So our friendly Euros, who do not as a general rule arm themselves (something about being more evolved.....), are manufacturing more firearms than the most heavily and well armed civilian populace in the western (aka evolved) world, the US.
No surprize there.
and how do you know they sell more than the US?
those stats merely say the percentage of the firearms manufactured that are exported/imported not the actual number of weapons made.
for all you know that 42% exports could be 42 pistols from 100 made and the US figure of 30% could be 30,000,000 out of 100,000,000. :D ok so its an exageration but the points the same.
Yeager surely you must agree the world has its fair share of idiots.Basically if those idiots cant go and buy a gun and are too thick to aquire one illegally you are less likely to be killed by one. More evolved? who said that? they are probably one of these idiots im talking about. I like guns, they look good, they do their job well and they make you feel quite good when you fire them but I just dont desire to own one.If i did id move to the US :)
-
I will settle for any restriction that is over and above modern hand held weapons.
still... I find it funny that so many euros are upset about what we do in the U.S. but they don't condem the manufaturers of pistols and longarms in their own countries.
hazed... you should move to japan if people not shooting each other is your prime concern.. or.... you could move to the U.S. and stay out of ghettos and big cities and be every bit as safe as in your little country. You and the japs have something in common... you realize that the less diversity of race and economics you have the less violence. That is fine but I will take my chances in the more interesting U.S.
lazs
-
And I find it funny that, like a broken Barbara Streisand record, you continually make the same irritating point - a point that centres around a belief that people in Europe generally, and the UK specifically, are obsessed by your firearms ownership. We're not, as several Brits have repeatedly said in this very thread. Beetle is different, and has a bee in his bonnet about guns, but last time I checked he was only voicing his opinion and was not representing the other 57,999,999 people who inhabit these isles.
Now, be a good chap, and head on back to general discussion, start another squeaky thread about furball vs strat or some such nonsense or go and buff your gun. Cheers mate!
BTW next time you go to London or the UK, stay away from the bars with the 'effeminate' patrons. Let's just say they are a minority without any ethnic basis and move on.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
There's some froth at the corner of your mouth, but at least the knee-jerk reaction is in tip top condition.
You should apply the above statement to yourself...of course the froth you speak of would be present at both sides of your mouth since you speak from both places.
-
Your opinion of course and your majesty is quite welcome to it.
But at least I use my mouth for speaking. You possess the perfect ventriloquist routine - providing you're not sitting down.
-
or.... you could move to the U.S. and stay out of ghettos and big cities and be every bit as safe as in your little country. You and the japs have something in common... you realize that the less diversity of race and economics you have the less violence.
Lazs, I've given you the figures before. The murder rate amongst whites in America is more than double the rate amongst all groups in the UK.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
But at least I use my mouth for speaking. You possess the perfect ventriloquist routine - providing you're not sitting down.
ROFL! Took me a second to get it - worth the wait - lol!
-
Hazed Quote:" merely like the way it is in the UK where im not likely to be shot by a drunk neighbour."
Are you implying that in the U.S. you are likely to be shot by a drunk neighbor?
Some of the Euro's here have complained that Americans know nothing about Europe. I've yet to see a Euro in here who knows much about the U.S. some of them think because they spent a week in L.A. that they know about the U.S. Well, L.A. is the cellpool of America and hardly represents the country as a whole.
Dowding, if you don't care about American gun ownership, why are you posting here?
-
I don't usually let unsubstanciated slights against my country pass. Do you?
-
hashwan.. the figures I have seen show that if you simply take out homicides that involve blacks you have the same amount of homicides in the U.S. as you do in england (or slightly less if you take only whites in the U.S.). that would be PER CAPITA of course... It matters not what weapon is used. Are you saying that if we removed all firearms and all blacks in the U.S. we would have less homicides than you do in england? Interesting.
dowding give it a rest.. you knee jerk in every time firearms are mentioned.. england wasn't even mentioned in the arms race. england can't build good small arms... they have lost the ability. just try not to let your sissy, neurotic fear of guns cause you to put your foot in your mouth for a change allright?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Your opinion of course and your majesty is quite welcome to it.
But at least I use my mouth for speaking. You possess the perfect ventriloquist routine - providing you're not sitting down.
Always dancing aren't ya Dowding. No direct dialogue from you other than the attempts at being clever.
The fact is that the same liberal spew found on these boards about gun control, cannot seem to handle the fact that instead of focusing your rants on our backyard, your very own is filled with much of the same.
Do ya feel dirty?
-
Direct dialogue? All we get from you is the odd snipe here, the odd snipe there and then the occasional long, whine filled passage about how everyone who disagrees with you is either a USA-hating heathen or has a pathological hate for Bush. Or both. It's old and tired, Rude. Like some half-assed comedy routine, that a half assed comedian holds onto and applies everywhere because he doesn't have anything else to offer.
You'll find I haven't commented on gun control. I truly, without equivocation, could not give a rat's bellybutton about what guns you have or want to have...
...but what does irritate me is the way my country is attacked as a retort to an individual's opinion. I generally will bite at that even though I shouldn't. But hey, if patriotism is a failing then so be it.
-
Someone is trying hard to get my attention. Heads up,..you have succeeded.