Discussion:
We need to ban all handguns in America NOW
(too old to reply)
G.I. Cho
2007-04-19 04:17:08 UTC
Permalink
How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
fight in Iraq.
Notan
2007-04-19 04:22:24 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.

--
Notan
Neil Ellwood
2007-04-19 05:20:29 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:

> G.I. Cho wrote:
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>> in Iraq.
>
> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>
Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
do this.
--
Neil
reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email
Hertz_Donut
2007-04-19 06:35:53 UTC
Permalink
"Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:***@btopenworld.com...
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>> in Iraq.
>>
>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
> do this.
>

Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...

How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to be
built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
breaker for 30 years?

Next time, try thinking before you post...

Honu
What Me Worry?
2007-04-20 16:43:39 UTC
Permalink
"Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>
> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>
>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>>> in Iraq.
>>>
>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>
>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>> do this.
>>
>
> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...

You're not in favor of jailing criminals?

> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
> breaker for 30 years?

Why are you soft on gun crime?
Bill Funk
2007-04-21 00:26:25 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
wrote:

>
>"Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>>
>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>>
>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>>>> in Iraq.
>>>>
>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>>
>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>>> do this.
>>>
>>
>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
>
>You're not in favor of jailing criminals?

Owning a gun is not a crime.
>
>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
>> breaker for 30 years?
>
>Why are you soft on gun crime?
>
Owning a gun is not a crime.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

John Edwards' campaign records showed Monday
that he paid eight hundred dollars for two
haircuts in Beverly Hills. There's no shame
in what he did. John Edwards represents the
downtrodden and the powerless in America,
and they deserve the very best.
Dan
2007-04-21 03:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Bill Funk wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
> wrote:
>
>> "Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>>>>> in Iraq.
>>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>>>
>>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>>>> do this.
>>>>
>>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
>> You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
>
> Owning a gun is not a crime.

It can be.


>>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
>>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
>>> breaker for 30 years?
>> Why are you soft on gun crime?
>>
> Owning a gun is not a crime.

It can be.


Dan
Harold Burton
2007-04-21 03:02:33 UTC
Permalink
In article <27fWh.77$***@newsfe02.lga>, Dan <***@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Bill Funk wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >> news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
> >>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
> >>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
> >>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
> >>>>>> in Iraq.
> >>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> >>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> >>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
> >>>> do this.
> >>>>
> >>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
> >> You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
> >
> > Owning a gun is not a crime.
>
> It can be.
>
>
> >>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
> >>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
> >>> breaker for 30 years?
> >> Why are you soft on gun crime?
> >>
> > Owning a gun is not a crime.


> It can be.


So can being a leftard.
Dan
2007-04-22 00:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Harold Burton wrote:
> In article <27fWh.77$***@newsfe02.lga>, Dan <***@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Bill Funk wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>>>>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>>>>>>> in Iraq.
>>>>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>>>>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>>>>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>>>>>> do this.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
>>>> You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
>>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
>> It can be.
>>
>>
>>>>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
>>>>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
>>>>> breaker for 30 years?
>>>> Why are you soft on gun crime?
>>>>
>>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
>
>
>> It can be.
>
>
> So can being a leftard.

Your point?

What is a "leftard," anyway?

Somehow, if I qualify, I guess it must be a good thing! Of course, if
it means somehow subpar in intelligence, as the word seems to imply,
then I obviously do not qualify. I am very conservative, but the
current crop of mindless drones still places me to the "left."

Oh well.

Dan
Harold Burton
2007-04-22 02:30:44 UTC
Permalink
In article <nVxWh.2597$***@newsfe12.lga>,
Dan <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Harold Burton wrote:
> > In article <27fWh.77$***@newsfe02.lga>, Dan <***@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Bill Funk wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
> >>>>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
> >>>>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
> >>>>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We
> >>>>>>>> have
> >>>>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >>>>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >>>>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> >>>>>>>> fight
> >>>>>>>> in Iraq.
> >>>>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> >>>>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> >>>>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>> do this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
> >>>> You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
> >>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
> >> It can be.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun
> >>>>> law
> >>>>> breaker for 30 years?
> >>>> Why are you soft on gun crime?
> >>>>
> >>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
> >
> >
> >> It can be.
> >
> >
> > So can being a leftard.
>
> Your point?


What part of "being a leftard" didn't you understand?
Hertz_Donut
2007-04-21 03:11:12 UTC
Permalink
"Dan" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:27fWh.77$***@newsfe02.lga...
> Bill Funk wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>>>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>>>>>>> fight
>>>>>>> in Iraq.
>>>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>>>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>>>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage
>>>>> to
>>>>> do this.
>>>>>
>>>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
>>> You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
>>
>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
>
> It can be.
>
>
>>>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need
>>>> to be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun
>>>> law breaker for 30 years?
>>> Why are you soft on gun crime?
>> Owning a gun is not a crime.
>
> It can be.
>
>
> Dan

Here's your sign....

Honu
What Me Worry?
2007-04-21 05:26:30 UTC
Permalink
"Bill Funk" <***@there.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:39 -0500, "What Me Worry?" <***@____.___>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Hertz_Donut" <***@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>news:-***@hawaiiantel.net...
>>>
>>> "Neil Ellwood" <***@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@btopenworld.com...
>>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>>>>>> fight
>>>>>> in Iraq.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>>>
>>>> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>>>> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>>>> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>>>> do this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow...just when I thought that idiocy had reached it's limit...
>>
>>You're not in favor of jailing criminals?
>
> Owning a gun is not a crime.

If it was, anyone posessing a gun could be immediately arrested. What would
that do for violent crime stats? Gang turf wars?

>>> How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need to
>>> be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun law
>>> breaker for 30 years?
>>
>>Why are you soft on gun crime?
>>
> Owning a gun is not a crime.

Handguns are illegal in Britain. Banning handguns is good for America.
Ron Hunter
2007-04-19 08:36:55 UTC
Permalink
Neil Ellwood wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>> in Iraq.
>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
> do this.
In the US, there wouldn't be enough people left free to pay taxes to
support the ones in prison. Silly idea.
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-19 09:41:08 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 2:20 am, Neil Ellwood <***@btopenworld.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
> > G.I. Cho wrote:
> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
> >> in Iraq.
>
> > Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>
> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
> do this.
> --
> Neil
> reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email

For a moment, let's assume that it were feasible to ban handguns. The
lib-types who would ban handguns would never allow such a
punishment....
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:28:26 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:20:29 -0500, Neil Ellwood
<***@btopenworld.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>> in Iraq.
>>
>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
>Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>do this.

That's not courage, it's stupidity.
Explain the mechanics of this, then explain how the economy would
handle it.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
Ole redneck
2007-04-20 01:35:00 UTC
Permalink
On 19 Apr, 00:20, Neil Ellwood <***@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
> > G.I. Cho wrote:
> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
> >> in Iraq.
>
> > Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>
> Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
> imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
> problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
> do this.

The founding fathers believed you would. That is why we have the 2nd
amendment so we can prevent a psychotic like you, from locking all of
us up at hard labor for 30 years.

> --
> Neil
> reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:34:30 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:20:29 -0500, Neil Ellwood
<***@btopenworld.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:22:24 -0600, Notan wrote:
>
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and fight
>>> in Iraq.
>>
>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
>Sentencing everyone who is convicted of having one to 30 years
>imprisonment with hard labour and basic food only would lessen the
>problem in a few years - of course no country would have the courage to
>do this.


Doesnt seem to be working in the UK......or Canada, or even Mexico....

Then there is that pesky COnstitution thingy.....


Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
J. F. Cornwall
2007-04-19 12:51:35 UTC
Permalink
Notan wrote:

> G.I. Cho wrote:
>
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>
>
> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>
And how this relates to digital photography...
Tankfixer
2007-04-21 15:51:43 UTC
Permalink
In article <zzJVh.92696$***@newsfe21.lga>, ***@cox.net
mumbled
> Notan wrote:
>
> > G.I. Cho wrote:
> >
> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> >> fight in Iraq.
> >
> >
> > Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
> >
> And how this relates to digital photography...

Because after they ban guns they intend to come after users of digital
cameras.

On the ground that a few people use them to commit crimes therfore all
must be banned.


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
Chas.Chan
2007-04-19 15:34:26 UTC
Permalink
"Notan" <***@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote in message
news:S-***@giganews.com...
> G.I. Cho wrote:
> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> > fight in Iraq.
>
> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>

The same way Mao Tse Dung, Jos. Stalin and Hiler did it.

The founding fathers knew that guns promote freedom and that Tyrants from
Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the
simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control.
m II
2007-04-20 01:35:01 UTC
Permalink
Chas.Chan wrote:

>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
>
> The same way Mao Tse Dung, Jos. Stalin and Hiler did it.
>
> The founding fathers knew that guns promote freedom and that Tyrants from
> Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the
> simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control.


Saddam Hussein never banned guns. Iraq had/has millions of AK47s in
circulation. By your criteria, the guy should have been a US hero and a
world renowned figure of Freedom and Democracy.




mike
Hertz_Donut
2007-04-20 02:25:12 UTC
Permalink
"m II" <***@in.the.hat> wrote in message news:9NUVh.8441$j%***@edtnps90...
> Chas.Chan wrote:
>
>>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>>
>>
>> The same way Mao Tse Dung, Jos. Stalin and Hiler did it.
>>
>> The founding fathers knew that guns promote freedom and that Tyrants from
>> Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the
>> simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control.
>
>
> Saddam Hussein never banned guns. Iraq had/has millions of AK47s in
> circulation. By your criteria, the guy should have been a US hero and a
> world renowned figure of Freedom and Democracy.

Very silly analogy. Did Sadam force anyone to have guns? Did Sadam profit
from selling those "millions" of AK47's? Sadam wanted his populace to be
his last defense...to rise up against any "invaders".

Lucky for us, the drafters of the constitution were not stymied by such
myopic vision as yours.

Honu
Bill Funk
2007-04-20 02:32:03 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:34:26 -0500, "Chas.Chan" <***@charlies.com>
wrote:

>
>"Notan" <***@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote in message
>news:S-***@giganews.com...
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> > fight in Iraq.
>>
>> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.
>>
>
>The same way Mao Tse Dung, Jos. Stalin and Hiler did it.
>
>The founding fathers knew that guns promote freedom and that Tyrants from
>Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the
>simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control.
>
>
The founding fathers knew of Hitler, Mao and Stalin?
Wow! They were good!

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
Tankfixer
2007-04-21 15:49:21 UTC
Permalink
In article <S-***@giganews.com>,
***@ddressthatcanbespammed mumbled
> G.I. Cho wrote:
> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> > fight in Iraq.
>
> Please explain exactly how one bans unregistered handguns.

Last time I checked there were a number of drags that banned.
Ask him how we solve that problem ...


--
Usenetsaurus n. an early pedantic internet mammal, who survived on a
diet of static text and
cascading "threads."
Captain Compassion
2007-04-19 04:52:13 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Apr 2007 21:17:08 -0700, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>fight in Iraq.

Will the Government be allowed to keep their pistols and their assault
rifles?

--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.

Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS

"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.


"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant

Joseph R. Darancette
***@NOSPAMcharter.net
David Dyer-Bennet
2007-04-19 05:32:29 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

We certainly have a serious problem. That problem is the creation of
disarmament zones like VT, where people aren't allowed to defend
themselves. We need to stop doing that *now* before more people die.
Ron Hunter
2007-04-19 08:37:23 UTC
Permalink
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> G.I. Cho wrote:
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>
> We certainly have a serious problem. That problem is the creation of
> disarmament zones like VT, where people aren't allowed to defend
> themselves. We need to stop doing that *now* before more people die.
>
MUCH better idea!
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-19 09:46:27 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 2:32 am, David Dyer-Bennet <***@dd-b.net> wrote:
> G.I. Cho wrote:
> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> > fight in Iraq.
>
> We certainly have a serious problem. That problem is the creation of
> disarmament zones like VT, where people aren't allowed to defend
> themselves. We need to stop doing that *now* before more people die.

Imagine an upright student-citizen ignored the VT ban, carried
illegally, and brought Cho down early in the rampage.

Hero or Villian?

How would the media portray him/her? Certainly the DA would prosecute.
Robert Sturgeon
2007-04-19 15:14:07 UTC
Permalink
On 19 Apr 2007 02:46:27 -0700,
hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 19, 2:32 am, David Dyer-Bennet <***@dd-b.net> wrote:
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> > fight in Iraq.
>>
>> We certainly have a serious problem. That problem is the creation of
>> disarmament zones like VT, where people aren't allowed to defend
>> themselves. We need to stop doing that *now* before more people die.
>
>Imagine an upright student-citizen ignored the VT ban, carried
>illegally, and brought Cho down early in the rampage.
>
>Hero or Villian?

To his fellow students? A hero. To the mainstream news
media? A villain.

>How would the media portray him/her? Certainly the DA would prosecute.

That's the why of the saying -- Better to be judged by 12
than carried by 6.

--
Robert Sturgeon
Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
Tom Gardner
2007-04-20 05:37:43 UTC
Permalink
<hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 2:32 am, David Dyer-Bennet <***@dd-b.net> wrote:
>> G.I. Cho wrote:
>> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> > Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> > the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> > fight in Iraq.
>>
>> We certainly have a serious problem. That problem is the creation of
>> disarmament zones like VT, where people aren't allowed to defend
>> themselves. We need to stop doing that *now* before more people die.
>
> Imagine an upright student-citizen ignored the VT ban, carried
> illegally, and brought Cho down early in the rampage.
>
> Hero or Villian?
>
> How would the media portray him/her? Certainly the DA would prosecute.
>

How many guns are carried by students TODAY? People will risk it now.
Myal
2007-04-19 05:34:03 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.
>

wasnt there enough victims this time ?

you want the whole country unarmed so its all easy victims ? I see youre
thinking there ... youre a wannabe politician arent you ?
James Jones
2007-04-19 06:24:04 UTC
Permalink
"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
generous of you.
Stuart
2007-04-19 08:01:45 UTC
Permalink
"James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
news:***@vci.net...
>
> "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>
> You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
> generous of you.
>
>

I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve it
quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-19 09:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Stuart
2007-04-19 10:40:36 UTC
Permalink
<hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 19, 5:01 am, "Stuart" <stuart?@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
> "James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
>
> news:***@vci.net...
>
>
>
> > "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> >> fight in Iraq.
>
> > You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
> > generous of you.
>
> I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
> University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
> massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
> killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve
> it
> quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....

Life savers...

If your theory were true, police wouldn't carry firearms.

No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.
Ordinary citizens can range from highly self disciplined and possessed of
logical thought processes to the idiots who performed this outrage. You can
never assume or transpose your own moral and ethical values on the entire
population - it's also a pointless exercise to use words like "they should
do this or that" people are not that predictable... it is now known the
adult male brain is not fully developed till around 24 to 25. How many 18
year olds have a cool head? How many young men settle problems with a debate
rather than primitive fists or weapons at hand? nah! the population at large
needs to be de-armed and rely on a respect the police and authority. It
will take time but it will happed after to many more deaths force reality on
the USA - just compare the violence to nearly any other 1st world country.
redc1c4
2007-04-19 15:28:37 UTC
Permalink
Stuart wrote:
>
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 5:01 am, "Stuart" <stuart?@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
> > "James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
> >
> > news:***@vci.net...
> >
> >
> >
> > > "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> > >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> > >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> > >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> > >> fight in Iraq.
> >
> > > You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
> > > generous of you.
> >
> > I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
> > University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
> > massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
> > killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve
> > it
> > quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....
>
> Life savers...
>
> If your theory were true, police wouldn't carry firearms.
>
> No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.
> Ordinary citizens can range from highly self disciplined and possessed of
> logical thought processes to the idiots who performed this outrage. You can
> never assume or transpose your own moral and ethical values on the entire
> population - it's also a pointless exercise to use words like "they should
> do this or that" people are not that predictable... it is now known the
> adult male brain is not fully developed till around 24 to 25. How many 18
> year olds have a cool head? How many young men settle problems with a debate
> rather than primitive fists or weapons at hand? nah! the population at large
> needs to be de-armed and rely on a respect the police and authority. It
> will take time but it will happed after to many more deaths force reality on
> the USA - just compare the violence to nearly any other 1st world country.

you can't disarm the general public. to do so is unconstitutional, not to
mention both immoral and impractical. any attempt to do so wuld be as
productive as banning alcohol or drugs, and we've seen how *that* turned
out..... %-)

redc1c4,
pointing out the obvious, to the oblivious.
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
nick c
2007-04-19 18:55:44 UTC
Permalink
Stuart wrote:
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 5:01 am, "Stuart" <stuart?@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
>> "James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@vci.net...
>>
>>
>>
>>> "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>>>> fight in Iraq.
>>> You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
>>> generous of you.
>> I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
>> University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
>> massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
>> killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve
>> it
>> quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....
>
> Life savers...
>
> If your theory were true, police wouldn't carry firearms.
>
> No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.

I see .... personal protection should be at the option of the
legislator. LOL ......

> Ordinary citizens can range from highly self disciplined and possessed of
> logical thought processes to the idiots who performed this outrage. You can
> never assume or transpose your own moral and ethical values on the entire
> population - it's also a pointless exercise to use words like "they should
> do this or that" people are not that predictable... it is now known the
> adult male brain is not fully developed till around 24 to 25. How many 18
> year olds have a cool head?

Would you suggest that the military not accept enlistments from those
under 24 years of age because younger brains are not fully developed?

> How many young men settle problems with a debate
> rather than primitive fists or weapons at hand? nah! the population at large
> needs to be de-armed and rely on a respect the police and authority. It
> will take time but it will happed after to many more deaths force reality on
> the USA - just compare the violence to nearly any other 1st world country.
>

Okay, lets compare:



School shootings around the world
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

School shootings from around the world since 1996:

- Nov. 21, 2006: Sebastian Bosse, 18, opens fire at his former school in
Emsdetten, Germany, before killing himself. Five people are wounded and
scores hospitalized for smoke inhalation after he sets off smoke bombs.

- Sept. 13, 2006: Kimveer Gill, 25, opens fire in a cafeteria at a
Montreal
college, killing one student and wounding 19 before shooting himself.

- Sept. 28, 2004: Three teenagers are shot and killed by their 15-year-old
classmate at a high school in Carmen de Patagones, Argentina. The
suspect is
detained.

- Sept. 3, 2004: Chechen rebels take hundreds of students and teachers
hostage in a school in Beslan, Russia, for two days. The siege ends when
explosions tear through the school and security forces storm the building,
leaving 334 dead - more than half of them children - as well as 31
suspected
militants and 11 special forces soldiers.

- April 29, 2002: Dragoslav Petkovic, 17, shoots his teacher, then himself
at a school in Vlansenica, Bosnia-Herzegovina.

- April 26, 2002: Robert Steinhaeuser, 19, who had been expelled from a
school in Erfurt, Germany, kills 13 teachers, two former classmates and a
policeman, before shooting himself.

- Feb. 19, 2002: A man in his 20s fatally shoots the principal of his
former
high school in Freising, Germany, after killing two people at a company
where he was fired. The man then kills himself.

- Jan. 18, 2001: Two teenagers fatally shoot a 16-year-old student in a
bathroom at a school in a suburb of Stockholm, Sweden.

- March 30, 1997: A father in Sana'a, Yemen, kills four students and two
adults, including the headmistress, at the school his daughters attend. He
then walks to another school and kills a teacher there.

- March 13, 1996: Thomas Hamilton, 43, kills 16 kindergarten children and
their teacher in Dunblane, Scotland, before turning the gun on him


>
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:34:09 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:40:36 GMT, "Stuart" <stuart€@whodunnit8.com>
wrote:

>
><hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>On Apr 19, 5:01 am, "Stuart" <stuart?@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
>> "James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@vci.net...
>>
>>
>>
>> > "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> >> fight in Iraq.
>>
>> > You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
>> > generous of you.
>>
>> I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
>> University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
>> massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
>> killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve
>> it
>> quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....
>
>Life savers...
>
>If your theory were true, police wouldn't carry firearms.
>
>No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.
>Ordinary citizens can range from highly self disciplined and possessed of
>logical thought processes to the idiots who performed this outrage. You can
>never assume or transpose your own moral and ethical values on the entire
>population - it's also a pointless exercise to use words like "they should
>do this or that" people are not that predictable... it is now known the
>adult male brain is not fully developed till around 24 to 25. How many 18
>year olds have a cool head? How many young men settle problems with a debate
>rather than primitive fists or weapons at hand? nah! the population at large
>needs to be de-armed and rely on a respect the police and authority. It
>will take time but it will happed after to many more deaths force reality on
>the USA - just compare the violence to nearly any other 1st world country.
>

More liberal claptrap.
Are you old enough to remember when guns could be bought at local
hardware stores, and through mail order? Probably not.
The chaos you predict didn't happen when it was possible for basically
everyone to be armed. Why do you think if it didn't happen then, it
would happen now?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-20 22:10:31 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 7:40 am, "Stuart" <stuart€@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 5:01 am, "Stuart" <***@whodunnit8.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:***@vci.net...
>
> > > "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> > >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> > >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> > >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> > >> fight in Iraq.
>
> > > You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
> > > generous of you.
>
> > I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
> > University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
> > massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
> > killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve
> > it
> > quick smart. The gun lobby are  life haters....
>
> Life savers...
>
> If your theory were true, police wouldn't carry firearms.
>
> No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.

I have Constitutional authority. Besides, I am part of the militia
anyway.

> Ordinary citizens can range from highly self disciplined and possessed of
> logical thought processes to the idiots who performed this outrage.

This is a survival forum. Survive by carrying a weapon, not by
disarming yourself and presenting yourself to be killed.

> You can
> never assume or transpose your own moral and ethical values on the entire
> population - it's also a pointless exercise to use words like "they should
> do this or that" people are not that predictable... it is now known the
> adult male brain is not fully developed till around 24 to 25. How many 18
> year olds have a cool head? How many young men settle problems with a debate
> rather than primitive fists or weapons at hand?

Survive by arming yourself.

> nah! the population at large
> needs to be de-armed and rely on a respect the police and authority.

Thanks, but I'm really not interested.

> It
> will take time but it will happed after to many more deaths force reality on
> the USA - just compare the violence to nearly any other 1st world country.

And the hoodlums will run wild, and those who are trained and have
legislative authority will likely run wild, too, as will their bosses.
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:36:43 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:40:36 GMT, "Stuart" <stuart€@whodunnit8.com>
wrote:

>
>No the police and militia are trained and have legislative authority.


On which planet?

Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:31:09 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:01:45 GMT, "Stuart" <stuart€@whodunnit8.com>
wrote:

>
>"James Jones" <***@happeyvalley.net> wrote in message
>news:***@vci.net...
>>
>> "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>>> fight in Iraq.
>>
>> You're going to let us keep our rifles and shotguns? Gee, that's awfully
>> generous of you.
>>
>>
>
>I can just see it ,arm everyone including the immature students at
>University and schools - some idiot comes in and tries to recreate a
>massacre and it's guns ablazing to the left centre and right!!! an orgy of
>killing. If the USA had a population problem it would be one way to solve it
>quick smart. The gun lobby are life haters....
>
Typical liberal answer!
You actually think this would happen?
Think: it's only in recent years that gun bans were instituted for
school campuses. Believe it or not, schools actually used to have gun
teams! Massacres didn't happen then.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
Hertz_Donut
2007-04-19 06:34:06 UTC
Permalink
"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.
>

How very simplistic. Do you think that banning guns will make them go away?
Do you have any idea of how many millions of weapons there are in this
country? Do you think that people who want to use guns to commit crimes
will not be able to find a gun when they want to?

What comes next? Take away our freedom of speech because someone says or
writes something that you don't like? Take away our right to vote because
someone might win an election that you don't like?

Next time, try something new....*THINK* before you post.

Honu
pjp
2007-04-19 07:59:57 UTC
Permalink
It's really simple to solve.

Make the manufacturers liable for their products.

In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.

Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
that'd hurt business so it's never considered.

You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.


"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.
>
Hertz_Donut
2007-04-19 08:09:26 UTC
Permalink
"pjp" <***@_hotmail_._com> wrote in message
news:1kFVh.25924$***@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> It's really simple to solve.
>
> Make the manufacturers liable for their products.

A simpleton's answer to a complex problem.

>
> In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.

Why? Cars kill people...let's stop making them. Knives kill people...let's
stop making them. Alcohol kills people, let'ts stop making it. Drugs of
all kinds, prescription and otherwise, kill people, let's stop making them.
Get the picture?

Cho ws a sick, sadistic fuck. Do you think he would not have found some
other way to kill if he couldn't buy a gun?
>
> Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
> that'd hurt business so it's never considered.

And your bigotry speaks volumes about you. What makes your country any
better? Are you telling me that no one in your country sells anything for
profit, even things that can be used to kill people?

>
> You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.
>

You accuse us of being *self-righteous* after the post you just made? You
are a textbook example of a self-righteous idiot.

Honu
strabo
2007-04-19 09:46:39 UTC
Permalink
pjp wrote:
> It's really simple to solve.
>
> Make the manufacturers liable for their products.
>
> In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.
>
> Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
> that'd hurt business so it's never considered.
>

It has been considered and there have been product liability
cases.

Since there is scarcely a product that cannot be blamed
for some problem, the distinct possibility exists of
shutting down all manufacturing. Law can do that.

> You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.
>

Touche. As you will richly deserve the fruits of the coming EU
anti-speech laws.

>
> "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>>
>
>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-19 09:56:17 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 6:46 am, strabo <***@flashlight.net> wrote:
> pjp wrote:
> > It's really simple to solve.
>
> > Make the manufacturers liable for their products.
>
> > In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.
>
> > Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
> > that'd hurt business so it's never considered.
>
> It has been considered and there have been product liability
> cases.
>
> Since there is scarcely a product that cannot be blamed
> for some problem, the distinct possibility exists of
> shutting down all manufacturing. Law can do that.
>
> > You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.
>
> Touche. As you will richly deserve the fruits of the coming EU
> anti-speech laws.

It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
rampages.
dennis@home
2007-04-19 10:30:56 UTC
Permalink
<hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...


> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
> rampages.
>

When?
What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
redc1c4
2007-04-19 15:25:03 UTC
Permalink
"***@home" wrote:
>
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
> > rampages.
> >
>
> When?
> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?

since guns are outlawed there, you shouldn't have *any* gun killings,
yet you do, and the number is increasing every year.

care to explain how that w*rks?

redc1c4,
pointing out the obvious, to the oblivious. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute
2007-04-19 15:47:33 UTC
Permalink
In message news:***@drunkenbastards.org.ies, redc1c4 sprach
forth the following:

> "***@home" wrote:
>>
>> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>> > rampages.
>> >
>>
>> When?
>> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>
> since guns are outlawed there, you shouldn't have *any* gun killings,
> yet you do, and the number is increasing every year.
>
> care to explain how that w*rks?

Ask the mayor of Nagasaki the same question. Or the PM of Australia (44%
rise in armed robbery after gun ban).
nick c
2007-04-19 19:46:06 UTC
Permalink
***@home wrote:
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>> rampages.
>>
>
> When?
> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>
>

No rampage (that I'm readily know of), but soon after the gun ban and
confiscation took place in the UK, wasn't there a young popular female
TV news reporter shot to death on the front steps of her home in
London? How did the assailant acquire a gun months after the gun ban
and confiscation took place?

Since that time, would you assert that no one else in the UK has been
killed by an assailant who used a gun?
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute
2007-04-19 19:51:47 UTC
Permalink
In message news:4627c715$0$4938$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
forth the following:

> ***@home wrote:
>> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>>> rampages.
>>>
>>
>> When?
>> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>>
>>
>
> No rampage (that I'm readily know of), but soon after the gun ban and
> confiscation took place in the UK, wasn't there a young popular female
> TV news reporter shot to death on the front steps of her home in
> London? How did the assailant acquire a gun months after the gun ban
> and confiscation took place?
>
> Since that time, would you assert that no one else in the UK has been
> killed by an assailant who used a gun?

Ditto the mayor of Nagasaki.
nick c
2007-04-19 20:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute wrote:
> In message news:4627c715$0$4938$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
> forth the following:
>
>> ***@home wrote:
>>> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>>>> rampages.
>>>>
>>> When?
>>> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>>>
>>>
>> No rampage (that I'm readily know of), but soon after the gun ban and
>> confiscation took place in the UK, wasn't there a young popular female
>> TV news reporter shot to death on the front steps of her home in
>> London? How did the assailant acquire a gun months after the gun ban
>> and confiscation took place?
>>
>> Since that time, would you assert that no one else in the UK has been
>> killed by an assailant who used a gun?
>
> Ditto the mayor of Nagasaki.

<Grinning>

Food for thought:

If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
the British government and not trust British citizens to act
responsibly and sensible.

Seems to me, the UK government wouldn't hesitate to arm its citizenry
if an invasion were thought to be the intent of another nation.
Churchill said he would arm every able bodied person if an invasion
were to take place. I guess that's the way some governments are. Arm
the people with all sorts of arms when necessary and trust them to
fight and if necessary die protect the seat of government, then disarm
them when the danger passes 'cause the people can't be trusted with arms.

In those dire times, government doesn't care for the health and
welfare of the people, as in, how many kids were killed in schools or
what a national death toll by firearms was so long as the seat of
government remains safe.

I, for one, would be tremendously impressed if a nation were to disarm
its citizenry, then abolish its military complex using the same
reasoning that ownership of firearms is bad and therefore there should
be no firearms.

Oh well, I tend to get sarcastic when I think how easy it is for good
intentions to be set aside when it's thought appropriate to do so.
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute
2007-04-19 22:32:56 UTC
Permalink
In message news:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
forth the following:

> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
> responsibly and sensible.

Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty food,
one can't place such high expectations thereupon.
Tom Gardner
2007-04-20 05:45:21 UTC
Permalink
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <***@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
news:***@66.250.146.128...
> In message news:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
> forth the following:
>
>> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
>> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
>> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
>> responsibly and sensible.
>
> Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty food,
> one can't place such high expectations thereupon.

Don't forget warm beer...Oh yea, Lucas makes refrigerators.
Billzz
2007-04-20 06:24:26 UTC
Permalink
"Tom Gardner" <tom(nospam)@ohiobrush.com> wrote in message
news:RrYVh.17909$***@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <***@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
> news:***@66.250.146.128...
>> In message news:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
>> forth the following:
>>
>>> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
>>> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
>>> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
>>> responsibly and sensible.
>>
>> Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty
>> food,
>> one can't place such high expectations thereupon.
>
> Don't forget warm beer...Oh yea, Lucas makes refrigerators.

Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."

And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a 1962
E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many times
their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962 Jaguar
cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range today.
So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them back.
They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a really
big kick in the butt to drive.
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute
2007-04-20 12:51:38 UTC
Permalink
In message news:ede5$46285c9f$9440b19b$***@STARBAND.NET, Billzz sprach
forth the following:

> And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a
> 1962 E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many
> times their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962
> Jaguar cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar
> range today. So they must have done something right.

Anna Nicole Smith memorabilia has some value too.
It's Americans OR Democrats
2007-04-20 16:32:48 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 20, 2:24 am, "Billzz" <***@starband.net> wrote:
> "Tom Gardner" <tom(nospam)@ohiobrush.com> wrote in message
>
> news:RrYVh.17909$***@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <***@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
> >news:***@66.250.146.128...
> >> In messagenews:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
> >> forth the following:
>
> >>> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
> >>> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
> >>> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
> >>> responsibly and sensible.
>
> >> Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty
> >> food,
> >> one can't place such high expectations thereupon.
>
> > Don't forget warm beer...Oh yea, Lucas makes refrigerators.
>
> Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."
>
> And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a 1962
> E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many times
> their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962 Jaguar
> cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range today.
> So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them back.
> They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a really
> big kick in the butt to drive.

A 1970 Convertible Hemi 'Cuda (Plymouth) bought 20 years ago for
$30,000 will net you about $1,000,000 today...
La N
2007-04-21 12:33:25 UTC
Permalink
"Billzz" <***@starband.net> wrote in message
news:ede5$46285c9f$9440b19b$***@STARBAND.NET...
> >
> Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."
>
> And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a
> 1962 E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many
> times their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962
> Jaguar cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range
> today. So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them
> back. They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a
> really big kick in the butt to drive.
>

Well, while I'm driving my Chevy to the levee ..... for me the Jags are
about the most esthetically pleasing .... (nice hood ornaments)

- nilita
Solaris
2007-04-21 12:48:24 UTC
Permalink
Ok heres the problem with any gun control legislation:

The ATF estimates there are currently over 258 million firearms in
circulation in the US. About 93 million are handguns. About 2
million handguns are manufactured or imported every year in the US.
Despite the increase in the number of firearms, the percentage of
households with some kind of firearm has declined significantly in
recent years. In the 1970's it was around 47%, as of 2002 it was
34%. In 1975 DC banned the purchase, sale, transfer, and possession
of all handguns. It exempted handguns and long guns previously
registered under a 1968 gun registration law. What happened as a
result? Murder trends in DC over the last 20 years suggest that the
1975 law was not effective. Murders declined significantly in the
late 1970's and early 80's. Then in the late 80's and early 90's the
murders skyrocketed, mainly as a result of the arrival of crack.
Young men in Washington who wanted to obtain a handgun had little
trouble getting one. Murders in DC have now started to decline,
consistent with a national reduction in violent crime. After an
exhaustive review of the DC gun ban, the National Academy of Sciences
found "no conclusive evidence" regarding the impact of the law.


So whats the problem?


Remember that 258 million firearms are already in circulation (93
million handguns). No one has offered a realistic plan to remove
these from circulation. A sizeable black market exist for the sale
and transfer of these firearms. Banning weapons only increases the
black market. You can also easily purchase a firearm at any gun show
across the country with little or no effort.


Banning handguns, or certain types of guns, or bullets are not going
to reduce serious crime.
Ron Hunter
2007-04-22 09:12:06 UTC
Permalink
La N wrote:
> "Billzz" <***@starband.net> wrote in message
> news:ede5$46285c9f$9440b19b$***@STARBAND.NET...
>> Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."
>>
>> And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a
>> 1962 E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many
>> times their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962
>> Jaguar cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range
>> today. So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them
>> back. They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a
>> really big kick in the butt to drive.
>>
>
> Well, while I'm driving my Chevy to the levee ..... for me the Jags are
> about the most esthetically pleasing .... (nice hood ornaments)
>
> - nilita
>
>
I still love the old Jag XKE. I loved the form of that car, but
couldn't possibly get in one. I hear one got written up for speeding
while sitting unoccupied in a parking space... They just LOOKED like
they were moving FAST!
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:48:31 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 23:24:26 -0700, "Billzz" <***@starband.net>
wrote:

>"Tom Gardner" <tom(nospam)@ohiobrush.com> wrote in message
>news:RrYVh.17909$***@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <***@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
>> news:***@66.250.146.128...
>>> In message news:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
>>> forth the following:
>>>
>>>> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
>>>> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
>>>> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
>>>> responsibly and sensible.
>>>
>>> Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty
>>> food,
>>> one can't place such high expectations thereupon.
>>
>> Don't forget warm beer...Oh yea, Lucas makes refrigerators.
>
>Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."
>
>And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a 1962
>E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many times
>their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962 Jaguar
>cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range today.
>So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them back.
>They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a really
>big kick in the butt to drive.
>


Ive got a pair of XK-E's available if you are interested. One is stone
original in British Racing green, the other needs minimal restoration
work, such as some rechroming and so forth.

Located in Santa Ana, California.

Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
La N
2007-04-22 02:15:07 UTC
Permalink
"Gunner" <***@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 23:24:26 -0700, "Billzz" <***@starband.net>
> wrote:
>
>>"Tom Gardner" <tom(nospam)@ohiobrush.com> wrote in message
>>news:RrYVh.17909$***@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>>>
>>> "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" <***@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
>>> news:***@66.250.146.128...
>>>> In message news:4627d729$0$17152$***@roadrunner.com, nick c sprach
>>>> forth the following:
>>>>
>>>>> If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
>>>>> and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
>>>>> the British government and not trust British citizens to act
>>>>> responsibly and sensible.
>>>>
>>>> Well, when an entire nation cannot produce a reliable car or a tasty
>>>> food,
>>>> one can't place such high expectations thereupon.
>>>
>>> Don't forget warm beer...Oh yea, Lucas makes refrigerators.
>>
>>Yes, as we Jaguar owners used to say, "Lucas, the Prince of Darkness."
>>
>>And yet I have owned a 1957 XK-140 Jaguar (raced at Laguna Seca) and a
>>1962
>>E-Type Jaguar, and whatever their shortcomings they are worth many times
>>their purchase price. My 1957 Jaguar cost me $800.00 and my 1962 Jaguar
>>cost me 2000.00, and they are in the 20,000 to 60,000 dollar range today.
>>So they must have done something right. I sure do wish I had them back.
>>They were a really big pain in the butt to maintain, but they were a
>>really
>>big kick in the butt to drive.
>>
>
>
> Ive got a pair of XK-E's available if you are interested. One is stone
> original in British Racing green, the other needs minimal restoration
> work, such as some rechroming and so forth.
>
> Located in Santa Ana, California.
>
> Gunner


Hey, Col. (ret'd) Billzz ... I'd go for the British Racing Green. I've seen
that colour of Jag.

And if *you* don't want it, my birthday is in August.

- nilita, a grrrrl can dream ...%)
Bill Funk
2007-04-20 02:36:27 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:54:42 -0700, nick c <n-***@cloudnine.com>
wrote:

>Seems to me, the UK government wouldn't hesitate to arm its citizenry
>if an invasion were thought to be the intent of another nation.

It wasn't that long ago when US citizens gave up many of their own
private firearms to arm British citizens in just that situation.
It seems Britain didn't have the manufacturing capability to do that
on its own.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:46:06 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:54:42 -0700, nick c <n-***@cloudnine.com> wrote:

>>> London? How did the assailant acquire a gun months after the gun ban
>>> and confiscation took place?
>>>
>>> Since that time, would you assert that no one else in the UK has been
>>> killed by an assailant who used a gun?
>>
>> Ditto the mayor of Nagasaki.
>
><Grinning>
>
>Food for thought:
>
>If the British government doesn't trust its citizenry to have firearms
>and act responsibly and sensible, should others follow the example of
>the British government and not trust British citizens to act
>responsibly and sensible.
>
>Seems to me, the UK government wouldn't hesitate to arm its citizenry
>if an invasion were thought to be the intent of another nation.
>Churchill said he would arm every able bodied person if an invasion
>were to take place. I guess that's the way some governments are. Arm
>the people with all sorts of arms when necessary and trust them to
>fight and if necessary die protect the seat of government, then disarm
>them when the danger passes 'cause the people can't be trusted with arms.


http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign-gun-control.htm

some fascinating links..pay particular attention to the British ones....

Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:37:26 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:30:56 +0100, "***@home"
<***@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>
><hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>> rampages.
>>
>
>When?
>What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>
Hows their crime rate doing since the last ban?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
It's Americans OR Democrats
2007-04-20 01:05:59 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 5:37 pm, Bill Funk <***@there.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:30:56 +0100, "***@home"
>
> <***@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
> ><hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
> >> rampages.
>
> >When?
> >What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>
> Hows their crime rate doing since the last ban?

Horrible. It's the frog in boiling water. Raise the temp gradually,
the frog just boils without a peep. They don't seem to notice the
rising tide of gun crime as long as it is confined to isolated
incidents, even though they are increasing. Much like Toronto seeing
50-odd gun murders happening in the space of a year, all committed by
the same group, but over time. But, let some distraught student do it
all at once.....In the 1960s, in Canada, you could buy a handgun in a
store, go out in the country and target shoot. Today, obtaining a
handgun takes six months of training, paperwork and interviews by
police. Yet the gun crime rate is up, up, up!! It all comes down to
one fact; Guns don't kill people, CERTAIN people kill people and
illegal gun availability is never even dented by controls, especially
when the punishment for illegal gun use is a slap on the wrist.
nick c
2007-04-20 02:17:46 UTC
Permalink
It's Americans OR Democrats wrote:
> On Apr 19, 5:37 pm, Bill Funk <***@there.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:30:56 +0100, "***@home"
>>
>> <***@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>>> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>>>> rampages.
>>> When?
>>> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>> Hows their crime rate doing since the last ban?
>
> Horrible. It's the frog in boiling water. Raise the temp gradually,
> the frog just boils without a peep. They don't seem to notice the
> rising tide of gun crime as long as it is confined to isolated
> incidents, even though they are increasing. Much like Toronto seeing
> 50-odd gun murders happening in the space of a year, all committed by
> the same group, but over time. But, let some distraught student do it
> all at once.....In the 1960s, in Canada, you could buy a handgun in a
> store, go out in the country and target shoot. Today, obtaining a
> handgun takes six months of training, paperwork and interviews by
> police. Yet the gun crime rate is up, up, up!! It all comes down to
> one fact; Guns don't kill people, CERTAIN people kill people and
> illegal gun availability is never even dented by controls, especially
> when the punishment for illegal gun use is a slap on the wrist.
>
>

It's been often said, the deadliest creature on earth is man.
Bill Funk
2007-04-20 02:43:37 UTC
Permalink
On 19 Apr 2007 18:05:59 -0700, It's Americans OR Democrats
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 19, 5:37 pm, Bill Funk <***@there.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:30:56 +0100, "***@home"
>>
>> <***@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>> ><hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>> >> rampages.
>>
>> >When?
>> >What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>>
>> Hows their crime rate doing since the last ban?
>
>Horrible. It's the frog in boiling water. Raise the temp gradually,
>the frog just boils without a peep. They don't seem to notice the
>rising tide of gun crime as long as it is confined to isolated
>incidents, even though they are increasing. Much like Toronto seeing
>50-odd gun murders happening in the space of a year, all committed by
>the same group, but over time. But, let some distraught student do it
>all at once.....In the 1960s, in Canada, you could buy a handgun in a
>store, go out in the country and target shoot. Today, obtaining a
>handgun takes six months of training, paperwork and interviews by
>police. Yet the gun crime rate is up, up, up!! It all comes down to
>one fact; Guns don't kill people, CERTAIN people kill people and
>illegal gun availability is never even dented by controls, especially
>when the punishment for illegal gun use is a slap on the wrist.
>

You know that, I know that,and so do many others.
But some people honestly thing gun control is about controlling guns,
when it's actually an attempt to control people through controlling
things.
It's very much like our (the US) war on drugs. It's an abject failure
(so bad that we actually have signs on the fences surrounding schools
saying that the school is a "Drug Free Zone"); drugs today are better,
cheaper, and more available than then the war started. Anyone here who
wants to do drugs is very able to do so.
We have people driving vans across the Mexico border with vans full of
drugs. If we were to actually ban guns, there would be vans driving
here full of guns, and the Border Patrol would admit (as they do now
with drugs) that htey can only catch about 10% of them.
Banning an item does not control that item; but somehow, there are
people who ignore reality in their quest for more control (read,
power).
Such people need to be pointed out as stupid.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-21 02:49:47 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 7:30 am, "***@home" <***@killspam.kicks-ass.net>
wrote:
> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
> > rampages.
>
> When?
> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2055148,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6363713.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1741336.stm

Google search: Handgun Murders United Kingdom

Those were just the first 3 return out of 2.7 MILLION. Yeh, "What
handgun rampages?"
dennis@home
2007-04-21 23:44:36 UTC
Permalink
<hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 7:30 am, "***@home" <***@killspam.kicks-ass.net>
> wrote:
>> <hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > It's OK. The UK has their own gun bans and yet still has gun
>> > rampages.
>>
>> When?
>> What gun rampage has their been since handguns were banned?
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2055148,00.html
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6363713.stm
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1741336.stm
>
> Google search: Handgun Murders United Kingdom
>
> Those were just the first 3 return out of 2.7 MILLION. Yeh, "What
> handgun rampages?"
>

They were not rampages.
They were mostly drug dealers killing each other.
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:36:52 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:59:57 GMT, "pjp"
<***@_hotmail_._com> wrote:

>It's really simple to solve.
>
>Make the manufacturers liable for their products.

Oh, yeah.
Car makers, too. Swimming pool installers, in fact all manufacturers.
That'll work well.
>
>In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.
>
>Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
>that'd hurt business so it's never considered.
>
>You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.

Do you ever stop to think? Or do you say everything that pops into
your liberal mind?
Simplistic doesn't even begin to describe your thinking.
>
>
>"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>>
>

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:40:33 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:59:57 GMT, "pjp"
<***@_hotmail_._com> wrote:

>It's really simple to solve.
>
>Make the manufacturers liable for their products.

They are. Strict warranty laws apply.

Now are you going to make Morris and Jaguar liable for hiway deaths?
>
>In fact, stop manufacturing the product sounds better.

What do we do with all those guns made by companies long out of
business. In fact..Ive a number of British made firearms, not limited to
Webley and so forth. Now what?

>
>Oh that's right, you yanks are so keen on money being above all else and
>that'd hurt business so it's never considered.

What does money have with the right to protect oneself from criminals or
crazies?
>
>You self-righteous hypocrites deserve the turmoil is my opinion.

Self rightious? My irony meter just burst into flames at your post read
aloud.

Laugh laugh laugh

Gunner

>
>
>"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>>
>

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
Ron Hunter
2007-04-19 08:36:01 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.
>
You want to try to take the guns away from their owners? FAT CHANCE.
When guns are outlawed, then I will GET ONE!
JohnM
2007-04-19 08:58:38 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.
>

Poor little troll, the stupid just came over you and you couldn't stop
from posting it.

John
Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute
2007-04-19 12:53:04 UTC
Permalink
In message news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, G.I.
Cho sprach forth the following:

> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither
inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for
the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage
than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater
confidence than an armed man.” - Thomas Jefferson
Sue
2007-04-19 13:57:55 UTC
Permalink
Piffle.
Sue
Myal
2007-04-19 14:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Sue wrote:
> Piffle.
> Sue
>
>

well said :)

but you could have added a hmph or something with it ....
Education_Is_Important
2007-04-19 14:38:21 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:09:54 GMT, Myal <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Sue wrote:
>> Piffle.
>> Sue
>>
>>
>
>well said :)
>
>but you could have added a hmph or something with it ....

How's about a Hurrumph, Passha, and hogwash.

The US has enough gun laws - the guns don't need to be banned - the
laws need to be better enforced. BESIDES, from a bumper sticker from
the past - WHICH IS TRUE - "If Guns Are Outlawed, ONLY Outlaws Will
Have Guns."

There are Millions of Legitimate/Legal, honest, hard-working and
devoted Family members in the United States who own hand-guns, Rifles,
Shotguns, etc. They take their responsibilities seriously and do
their best to ensure the weapons are handled in a responsible manner
and adequately secured. Unfortunately, on occasion, mistakes are made
and the WRONG PERSON(s) get their hands on these deadly weapons and
something like what happened in Virginia Tech occurs.

Regardless of the "news media coverage" - it tends to be a rare
instance - followed by several "COPY-CAT" types of situations.
Unfortunately - the hypesters come out in droves wanting to take any
and all weapons away from everyone - leaving the Criminal element to
get the weapons they need to continue their own careers. Because,
face it, if someone REALLY WANTS A WEAPON - that person WILL GET THE
WEAPON - regardless. Then where would these HYPESTERS be??
Sue
2007-04-19 22:30:11 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:38:21 -0500, Education_Is_Important
<***@Any.EDU> wrote:

>On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:09:54 GMT, Myal <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Sue wrote:
>>> Piffle.
>>> Sue
>>>
>>>
>>
>>well said :)
>>
>>but you could have added a hmph or something with it ....
>
>How's about a Hurrumph, Passha, and hogwash.

I'll see your harumph, passha and hogwash and raise you a balderdash.
Sue
Robert Sturgeon
2007-04-19 15:23:39 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:57:55 GMT, Sue <***@thegrid.net>
wrote:

>Piffle.

... brevity is the soul of wit.

--
Robert Sturgeon
Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
ray
2007-04-19 15:43:42 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:17:08 -0700, G.I. Cho wrote:

> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

I would assume the motivation for your post would be the recent tragedy in
Virginia. From what I gather thus far, he had been planning this for quite
some time and had purchased guns a month or more ago. It would be nearly
impossible to keep weapons out of the hands of someone planning a vicious
attack in advance. Best thing it might do would be to reduce 'acts of
passion' or opporunity - which this was not. Another argument could be
made that if a firearm were required in every dorm room, that someone
might have been able to stop him before the main mahem. Are you aware that
one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world is in Switzerland (or
is it Austria) where every male head of household is required by law to
own a firearm?

BTW - this is VERY off topic.
Rich
2007-04-19 16:25:56 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 12:17 am, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

40 years ago, some idiot liberal psychiatrists decided the best way to
expedite the treatment of loonies was to "intergrate" them into
society. The loonies were turfed from the insane asylums (it used to
be relatively easy to have someone confined) and crime SOARED. You
now see the results of this, people who are CLEARLY out of their minds
are allowed to live in society and the results are predictable. Time
to stop blaming "objects" for crimes and START blaming people.
To start with, all homeless people should be institutionalized. All
those determined to be a danger to themselves or the public should be
locked up.
Education_Is_Important
2007-04-19 17:08:05 UTC
Permalink
On 19 Apr 2007 09:25:56 -0700, Rich <***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 19, 12:17 am, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> fight in Iraq.
>
>40 years ago, some idiot liberal psychiatrists decided the best way to
>expedite the treatment of loonies was to "intergrate" them into
>society. The loonies were turfed from the insane asylums (it used to
>be relatively easy to have someone confined) and crime SOARED. You
>now see the results of this, people who are CLEARLY out of their minds
>are allowed to live in society and the results are predictable. Time
>to stop blaming "objects" for crimes and START blaming people.
>To start with, all homeless people should be institutionalized. All
>those determined to be a danger to themselves or the public should be
>locked up.


Rich:
Some of what you have to say is accurate and clearly supported
by Psychological Studies and information currently in the databases of
the Criminal Justice System and Criminology.
In so far as it being "Time to stop blaming "objects" and
START blaming People" is concerned - that too appear to be an accurate
outflow of logic and reason. However, in "most people's minds" - they
DON'T WANT TO BLAME the person - they want to blame the object -
because they feel - if the object wasn't there - the criminal act
would not have occurred [a classic example of faulty/circular logic].
What they don't realize is the fact that if the "object" hadn't been
there - "some other object" - equally or more devastating - probably
would have been used - and quite possibly have resulted in greater or
more devastating losses of life and property.
The one part of your posting I tend to take exception to is
the "...all homeless people should be institutionalized." inference.
I suggest that you may wish to amend your "blanket reference" to the
homeless.
Granted, there are a NUMBER of the homeless who should be
institutionalized - because of Mental Disease/Disorders, Drugs and/or
Alcohol ingestion, and other equally devastating problems. However,
NOW DAYS - there are numerous people who are "homeless" and living on
the streets due to Circumstances beyond their control and the GREED of
others. Not just men, but women, children, and infants - forced out
onto the streets because of the way the economy is, because of BACK
STABBING Co-workers, because of SUPERVISORS who take umbrage at
someone who is more intelligent, experienced, or trained than they are
and end up forcing a situation on the employee - because of jealousy.
There are any number of reasons for a person/family to be unemployed
and "homeless." Not just because of a Mental, Drug, or Alcohol
problem. So, you may wish to qualify/quantify your suggestion
regarding the "HOMELESS" and the fact that you think that they need to
be "institutionalized."
It's Americans OR Democrats
2007-04-19 21:40:11 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 1:08 pm, Education_Is_Important
<***@Any.EDU> wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2007 09:25:56 -0700, Rich <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Apr 19, 12:17 am, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> >> fight in Iraq.
>
> >40 years ago, some idiot liberal psychiatrists decided the best way to
> >expedite the treatment of loonies was to "intergrate" them into
> >society. The loonies were turfed from the insane asylums (it used to
> >be relatively easy to have someone confined) and crime SOARED. You
> >now see the results of this, people who are CLEARLY out of their minds
> >are allowed to live in society and the results are predictable. Time
> >to stop blaming "objects" for crimes and START blaming people.
> >To start with, all homeless people should be institutionalized. All
> >those determined to be a danger to themselves or the public should be
> >locked up.
>
> Rich:
> Some of what you have to say is accurate and clearly supported
> by Psychological Studies and information currently in the databases of
> the Criminal Justice System and Criminology.
> In so far as it being "Time to stop blaming "objects" and
> START blaming People" is concerned - that too appear to be an accurate
> outflow of logic and reason. However, in "most people's minds" - they
> DON'T WANT TO BLAME the person - they want to blame the object -
> because they feel - if the object wasn't there - the criminal act
> would not have occurred [a classic example of faulty/circular logic].
> What they don't realize is the fact that if the "object" hadn't been
> there - "some other object" - equally or more devastating - probably
> would have been used - and quite possibly have resulted in greater or
> more devastating losses of life and property.
> The one part of your posting I tend to take exception to is
> the "...all homeless people should be institutionalized." inference.
> I suggest that you may wish to amend your "blanket reference" to the
> homeless.
> Granted, there are a NUMBER of the homeless who should be
> institutionalized - because of Mental Disease/Disorders, Drugs and/or
> Alcohol ingestion, and other equally devastating problems. However,
> NOW DAYS - there are numerous people who are "homeless" and living on
> the streets due to Circumstances beyond their control and the GREED of
> others. Not just men, but women, children, and infants - forced out
> onto the streets because of the way the economy is, because of BACK
> STABBING Co-workers, because of SUPERVISORS who take umbrage at
> someone who is more intelligent, experienced, or trained than they are
> and end up forcing a situation on the employee - because of jealousy.
> There are any number of reasons for a person/family to be unemployed
> and "homeless." Not just because of a Mental, Drug, or Alcohol
> problem. So, you may wish to qualify/quantify your suggestion
> regarding the "HOMELESS" and the fact that you think that they need to
> be "institutionalized."

90% or more of the homeless population are mentally ill and need to be
treated and it's a bit difficult unless they are institutionalized.
The cost of institutionalizing them would be cheaper than dealing with
the crimes they commit.
Cynicor
2007-04-20 01:21:33 UTC
Permalink
It's Americans OR Democrats wrote:
>
> 90% or more of the homeless population are mentally ill and need to be
> treated and it's a bit difficult unless they are institutionalized.
> The cost of institutionalizing them would be cheaper than dealing with
> the crimes they commit.

That stat doesn't seem to be supported by the facts. First of all, only
10% of the homeless are chronically homeless. The other 90% are
short-term homeless, after a disaster or About a third of the homeless
population has schizophrenia or manic-depressive illness. (Versus 4% of
the general population.) Not 90%. So...nice sound bite, but utterly wrong.

However, we've had bigger problems with the mentally ill homeless ever
since Reagan slashed funding for their care.

http://mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/publications/allpubs/homelessness/
http://www.psychlaws.org/generalResources/fact11.htm
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week618/cover.html
Gunner
2007-04-22 02:03:22 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 21:21:33 -0400, Cynicor
<***@speak.ea.sy.net> wrote:

>
>However, we've had bigger problems with the mentally ill homeless ever
>since Reagan slashed funding for their care.
>
>http://mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/publications/allpubs/homelessness/
>http://www.psychlaws.org/generalResources/fact11.htm
>http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week618/cover.html


Indeed Reagan slashed funding..and good for him as well!

And here is why

“In January 1967, Ronald W. Reagan, the newly elected California
governor, ordered all state agencies to eliminate 10 percent of what he
characterized as ‘fat’ from their budgets. More specifically, he
insisted that state hospitals and institutions for the retarded cut
their budgets by $17 million. This cut, Reagan insisted, would
eliminate 3,700 state jobs, close fourteen state-operated outpatient
clinics, and begin a process of community-based care, with communities
taking greater responsibility for the guardianship of their ‘mental
patients.’ Angered by reaction to his proposals, Reagan remarked that
state hospitals (and prisons) constituted the ‘biggest hotel chain in
the state.’

“Nine months later, Niels Erik Bank-Mikkelsen, the director of the
Danish national services for mental retardation, visited the Sonoma
State Hospital, a large institution for the retarded in California.
Even before Reagan’s proposed cuts had fully taken effect,
Bank-Mikkelsen found conditions in the institution dreadful. He told a
reporter: ‘I couldn’t believe my eyes. It was worse than any
institution I have seen in visits to a dozen foreign countries. . . .
In our country, we would not be allowed to treat cattle like that.’ What
he had found were wards of naked adults sleeping on cement floors often
in their own excrement or wandering in open dayrooms. Not uncommon were
‘head bangers.’ Many residents were heavily medicated, existing in a
pharmacological daze, a daze exacerbated by the constant shouting and
screaming around them. In its defense, the California commissioner of
health and welfare insisted that the state’s treatment of the retarded
was ‘the most advanced in the nation.’ Bank-Mikkelsen feared he might be
right.” (256)

Now, let’s be clear about one thing: Reagan did not create those
conditions. In fact, you could argue that under such conditions,
policies of “de-institutionalization” and “community-based care” are
thoroughly humane-- but then, you’d have to argue that Reagan actually
provided the resources for humane de-institutionalization and
community-based care, and you shouldn’t try, because you’d hurt yourself
with the strain. No, the only thing Reagan is liable for here is that
brutal and quite gratuitous crack likening the state’s prisons and
mental hospitals to a “hotel chain"-- and the insistence that the “fat”
in the state mental health budget had to go.

That was almost 40 years ago-- but then again, it was a few years after
New York Senator Robert F. Kennedy’s 1965 attack on the inhuman
conditions of the Rome and Willowbrook State Schools. Draw from this
what lessons you will, and let’s hope we all learn to do better by those
with cognitive and developmental disabilities from here on in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura's_Law


"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:52:08 UTC
Permalink
On 19 Apr 2007 14:40:11 -0700, It's Americans OR Democrats
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 19, 1:08 pm, Education_Is_Important
><***@Any.EDU> wrote:
>> On 19 Apr 2007 09:25:56 -0700, Rich <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Apr 19, 12:17 am, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> >> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>> >> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>> >> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>> >> fight in Iraq.
>>
>> >40 years ago, some idiot liberal psychiatrists decided the best way to
>> >expedite the treatment of loonies was to "intergrate" them into
>> >society. The loonies were turfed from the insane asylums (it used to
>> >be relatively easy to have someone confined) and crime SOARED. You
>> >now see the results of this, people who are CLEARLY out of their minds
>> >are allowed to live in society and the results are predictable. Time
>> >to stop blaming "objects" for crimes and START blaming people.
>> >To start with, all homeless people should be institutionalized. All
>> >those determined to be a danger to themselves or the public should be
>> >locked up.
>>
>> Rich:
>> Some of what you have to say is accurate and clearly supported
>> by Psychological Studies and information currently in the databases of
>> the Criminal Justice System and Criminology.
>> In so far as it being "Time to stop blaming "objects" and
>> START blaming People" is concerned - that too appear to be an accurate
>> outflow of logic and reason. However, in "most people's minds" - they
>> DON'T WANT TO BLAME the person - they want to blame the object -
>> because they feel - if the object wasn't there - the criminal act
>> would not have occurred [a classic example of faulty/circular logic].
>> What they don't realize is the fact that if the "object" hadn't been
>> there - "some other object" - equally or more devastating - probably
>> would have been used - and quite possibly have resulted in greater or
>> more devastating losses of life and property.
>> The one part of your posting I tend to take exception to is
>> the "...all homeless people should be institutionalized." inference.
>> I suggest that you may wish to amend your "blanket reference" to the
>> homeless.
>> Granted, there are a NUMBER of the homeless who should be
>> institutionalized - because of Mental Disease/Disorders, Drugs and/or
>> Alcohol ingestion, and other equally devastating problems. However,
>> NOW DAYS - there are numerous people who are "homeless" and living on
>> the streets due to Circumstances beyond their control and the GREED of
>> others. Not just men, but women, children, and infants - forced out
>> onto the streets because of the way the economy is, because of BACK
>> STABBING Co-workers, because of SUPERVISORS who take umbrage at
>> someone who is more intelligent, experienced, or trained than they are
>> and end up forcing a situation on the employee - because of jealousy.
>> There are any number of reasons for a person/family to be unemployed
>> and "homeless." Not just because of a Mental, Drug, or Alcohol
>> problem. So, you may wish to qualify/quantify your suggestion
>> regarding the "HOMELESS" and the fact that you think that they need to
>> be "institutionalized."
>
>90% or more of the homeless population are mentally ill and need to be
>treated and it's a bit difficult unless they are institutionalized.
>The cost of institutionalizing them would be cheaper than dealing with
>the crimes they commit.
>
Yet the Left and the ACLU will fight this tooth and nail.

They would rather have a person living in delusions in a cardboard box
and slowly dying, than having that person forced into treatment and
turned into a useful citizen.

Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
the_blogologist
2007-04-19 19:23:47 UTC
Permalink
G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

The shooter violated a gun ban.
Jack Linthicum
2007-04-19 19:25:13 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 12:17 am, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
> fight in Iraq.

You mean like Great Britain who banned all hand guns from about 1946
on. There are still 300,000 illegal handguns in GB, one for every 400
people.
Bill Funk
2007-04-19 21:27:18 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Apr 2007 21:17:08 -0700, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>fight in Iraq.

We have a ban on many drugs now.
Is it working? (In case you're not paying attention, the answer is a
resounding NO! Anyone who wants drugs is getting them.)
If you could explain the mechanics of actually getting a ban to work,
explain it. The DOJ wants to know.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Rudy Giuliani will address students at Pat
Robertson's university next week. He is for
gay rights, abortion, gun control and divorce.
Pat Robertson plans to hand out sticks and
marshmallows to the students to take advantage
of the fire surrounding the podium.
W***@ticking_clock.com
2007-04-19 23:41:41 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Apr 2007 21:17:08 -0700, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>fight in Iraq.
Try weaning yourself off your drugs and get back to us when
you get a clue.
Harold Burton
2007-04-20 03:08:50 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
"G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
> the pistols and the assault rifles...



Yawn, and that will be just as successful as prohibition and the war on
drugs. I love the naivete (that's a euphemism for stupidity) of
leftards.
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-04-21 02:27:53 UTC
Permalink
In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.

IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.

--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Harold Burton
2007-04-21 02:47:17 UTC
Permalink
In article <f0bsr9$9vf$***@reader2.panix.com>,
***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:

> In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>
> IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
> irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
> people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.

Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
love the naivete of idiots.
Robert Sturgeon
2007-04-21 15:38:01 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:47:17 -0400, Harold Burton
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>In article <f0bsr9$9vf$***@reader2.panix.com>,
> ***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>
>> In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>
>> IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
>> irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
>> people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.
>
>Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
>many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
>that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
>concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
>love the naivete of idiots.

They believe that their theory MUST be correct, so its
obvious failure is the result of insufficient application.
(As in -- "The floggings will contiunue until morale
improves.") If "gun free" zones don't work (and the events
at VT and various other "gun free" zones indicate they
don't), make the whole country a gun free zone.

What??? Gun owners unwilling to give up their guns; 258
million guns here already, guns easy to make, guns easy to
smuggle??? Doesn't matter. "I'm right; my theory is right;
and I really don't care what reality is trying to tell me!"

--
Robert Sturgeon
Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-21 23:40:51 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 21, 12:38 pm, Robert Sturgeon <***@inreach.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:47:17 -0400, Harold Burton
>
>
>
>
>
> <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >In article <f0bsr9$***@reader2.panix.com>,
> > ***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>
> >> In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >> > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>
> >> IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
> >> irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
> >> people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.
>
> >Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
> >many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
> >that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
> >concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
> >love the naivete of idiots.
>
> They believe that their theory MUST be correct, so its
> obvious failure is the result of insufficient application.
> (As in -- "The floggings will contiunue until morale
> improves.") If "gun free" zones don't work (and the events
> at VT and various other "gun free" zones indicate they
> don't), make the whole country a gun free zone.

Two isnlandnationswith totalcontrol over theirborders... UK and
Australia. Both abyssmal failuresin guncontrol.

> What??? Gun owners unwilling to give up their guns; 258
> million guns here already, guns easy to make, guns easy to
> smuggle??? Doesn't matter. "I'm right; my theory is right;
> and I really don't care what reality is trying to tell me!"

They CAN argue against fact and logic. It is the basis for their
religion.

> Robert Sturgeon
> Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms should be a convenience store, not a government agency.http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
h***@hotmail.com
2007-04-21 23:34:48 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 20, 11:47 pm, Harold Burton <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <f0bsr9$***@reader2.panix.com>,
>
> ***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
> > In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> > > a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>
> > IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
> > irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
> > people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.
>
> Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
> many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
> that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
> concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
> love the naivete of idiots.

But they mean well.
Dan
2007-04-22 00:31:32 UTC
Permalink
hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 20, 11:47 pm, Harold Burton <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <f0bsr9$***@reader2.panix.com>,
>>
>> ***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>> In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>>> IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
>>> irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
>>> people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.
>> Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
>> many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
>> that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
>> concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
>> love the naivete of idiots.
>
> But they mean well.
>
>
Yeah, the right wing nut cases usually do "mean well."

Dan
Harold Burton
2007-04-22 02:31:19 UTC
Permalink
In article <UWxWh.2621$***@newsfe12.lga>,
Dan <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

> hot-ham-and-***@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Apr 20, 11:47 pm, Harold Burton <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> In article <f0bsr9$***@reader2.panix.com>,
> >>
> >> ***@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
> >>> In misc.survivalism G.I. Cho <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
> >>>> a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
> >>> IMO, we have serious social problems. The tool chosen by a nutcase is
> >>> irrelevant. Had he chosen to crash a pickup into a city bus, killing 32
> >>> people, there would be no demand to ban either trucks or busses.
> >> Uh-uh. There are nut cases who would advocate just that, just not as
> >> many as those who advocate gun confiscation. Still the gun nuts believe
> >> that their goal of confiscation will succeed when so many similar
> >> concepts (booze and drugs come to mind) have failed miserably. Gotta
> >> love the naivete of idiots.
> >
> > But they mean well.
> >
> >
> Yeah, the right wing nut cases usually do "mean well."


Just like the left wing nut cases.
Gunner
2007-04-22 01:33:34 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Apr 2007 21:17:08 -0700, "G.I. Cho" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up? We have
>a serious gun problem in this country and it's time to take a stand.
>Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns. Get rid of
>the pistols and the assault rifles unless you want to go over and
>fight in Iraq.


Why? What serious gun problem?

Gunner Asch

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...