water cannon

[ATAG_Doc]

Originally Posted by Hunden

How did you know I was playing my banjo?

Hey you play yours I will play mine and we do the dueling banjos like in the movie deliverance.

[Pudfark]

Originally Posted by timej31

Hey you play yours I will play mine and we do the dueling banjos like in the movie deliverance.

I just can't resist.....

And the one without the gun?
Gets to squeal like a piggy......

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by MD_Titus

utter tosh.

utter tosh?! First of all, was I talking to you? No. Second thing, you reckon that a citizen that doesn't vote or doesn't understand the importance and value of his vote is a responsible one?

again you ignore the salient point - the majority of UK citizens are happy with the restricted ownership of guns. most, if not all, would also support even harsher sentencing for illegal ownership of guns.

this is the law of the land.

it is democratically supported.

i vote in national and local elections.

and i am far from uninformed.

oh yes, I remember when they made a referendum on the subject, and citizen were asked whether they would be for or against the prohibiting of only certain firearms instead of re-thinking the gun policies.. oh wait, it never happened, they did choose what's better for you (and them: blame the firearms, not their ineffective laws)..

But because it never was an effective change, after years another gun massacre happened, and instead of raising the obvious question "should police officers be armed in order to face such rare but possible outbursts of violence?", they watched impotent as an armed man held a part of the country hostage of terror, because the police forces couldn't stop him for 4 hours (he started shooting at around 10am, and the police was notified by 10.20), cos even when they started following him in the car, the PCs were unharmed and had no mean of stopping him..
Try and say "sorry, but shit happens" to the families of the 13 victims. It's a bloody shambles, and there's no justification for it. Times are changing, and police should adapt their methods to a society that is getting more violent (with or without firearms).

sending armed troops onto the street to deal with rioters is the reserve of syria. the riots happened for very deeply ingrained issues, and quickly degenerated into simply looting... which is again a result of deeply ingrained issues. as soon as a sufficient police response was established the problem was extinguished, and with a minimal loss of life.

erm, no, you probably still think that Armed troops would do what the English Army did in Ireland, but that's other times..
as soon as?! 4 days?!?! The looting stopped mainly cos there was nothing left to loot, not because of the "adequate policing", let's not forget they are the one who said "we were not ready for this" (utterly insane!) and are now changing their methods and bosses.

with less restricted gun ownership (and don't ignore that a lot of those currently on remand for their part in the riots were first offenders with no psychiatric issues which would preclude gun ownership), or a heavily armed response... it would've been a bloodbath.

..seriously? And you think that you'd issue a lot of gun licenses to people that live in potentially dangerous areas, who are on welfare or have a criminal record? Besides it's a matter of armed police forces in that case: nowadays people well know the threat of an armed police officer in front of them and get contained easily. See what happens in the rest of the world when riot police gets on the roads.

Uh and since you mentioned Syria, which is a corrupt regime, I could tell you "see what happened in Lybia when citizens gets weapons: they dispose of tyrants".

Considering how soft bellied and spoiled we are nowadays, if the UK became a corrupt regime you'd just keep calm and carry on..

when people cite the laws of other countries and wish to implement them in this country, i will defend my country and the laws i live under where i agree with them - and if i do not i will still respect the democratic process that has led to their implementation. i will not bitch and moan that the laws should be changed simply because it inconveniences me. and i will do this regardless of who i am arguing with.

The UK laws do not inconvenience me at all, I am just stressing on the fact that some laws are indeed ridiculous and only offer an illusion of safety, because they address the problem in a fascist way (denying their own fault and depriving you of things).

[winny]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

oh yes, I remember when they made a referendum on the subject, and citizen were asked whether they would be for or against the prohibiting of only certain firearms instead of re-thinking the gun policies.. oh wait, it never happened, they did choose what's better for you (and them: blame the firearms, not their ineffective laws)..

Me again No, what happened is they said 'we're banning handguns' the vast Majority of the UK went 'Oh, Ok..' There was no popular movement crying out that Handguns shold't be banned, you just don't get that the majority of people in the UK just don't give a sh*t about guns.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

But because it never was an effective change, after years another gun massacre happened, and instead of raising the obvious question "should police officers be armed in order to face such rare but possible outbursts of violence?", they watched impotent as an armed man held a part of the country hostage of terror, because the police forces couldn't stop him for 4 hours (he started shooting at around 10am, and the police was notified by 10.20), cos even when they started following him in the car, the PCs were unharmed and had no mean of stopping him..
Try and say "sorry, but shit happens" to the families of the 13 victims. It's a bloody shambles, and there's no justification for it. Times are changing, and police should adapt their methods to a society that is getting more violent (with or without firearms).

This point is about arming the Police, not arming the population. You mistrust the Police and want to arm them too?! All over the place...

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

erm, no, you probably still think that Armed troops would do what the English Army did in Ireland, but that's other times..
as soon as?! 4 days?!?! The looting stopped mainly cos there was nothing left to loot, not because of the "adequate policing", let's not forget they are the one who said "we were not ready for this" (utterly insane!) and are now changing their methods and bosses.

Why on earth would you bring up bloody sunday, another cheap shot against the UK. I said it before, leave. I don't want you here, slagging us of whilst taking our money, double standards.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

..seriously? And you think that you'd issue a lot of gun licenses to people that live in potentially dangerous areas, who are on welfare or have a criminal record? Besides it's a matter of armed police forces in that case: nowadays people well know the threat of an armed police officer in front of them and get contained easily. See what happens in the rest of the world when riot police gets on the roads.

What happens is people die. Apple can afford to restock their shop. Or is money more important than life?

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Considering how soft bellied and spoiled we are nowadays, if the UK became a corrupt regime you'd just keep calm and carry on..

Bull. Utterly wrong. (And I take it the 'we' you mean you)

Your air of superiority is palpable.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by winny

Me again No, what happened is they said 'we're banning handguns' the vast Majority of the UK went 'Oh, Ok..' There was no popular movement crying out that Handguns shold't be banned, you just don't get that the majority of people in the UK just don't give a sh*t about guns.

even if you cared you wouldn't have obtained anything.

See what happened lately with the insane raise of university taxes, you tell me that nobody cared? It affected (and will affect) students, universities and employees.. thousands of people got on the road to protest, but in that case the police was quite swift in sending everybody home there.. don't you really see what they do to our society?!

This point is about arming the Police, not arming the population. You mistrust the Police and want to arm them too?! All over the place...

no, arming the police AND arming citizens who are deemed as suitable by a fair and adequate institution. Disarming everybody seems the easiest solution, but in fact you deprive people of their own basic rights.

Why on earth would you bring up bloody sunday, another cheap shot against the UK. I said it before, leave. I don't want you here, slagging us of whilst taking our money, double standards.

it burns uh? it's your heritage, like the bloody heritage of any other modern country.. Your beloved Cromwell killed 3500 Irish people in the Siege of Drogheda; the Croke Park Massacre, the Bogside Massacre (Bloody Sunday).. shall I carry on? Your country is not better or worse than many others.

Yeah, taking your money, your women.. anything else?
Fortunately they're not all arrogant, ignorant bigots like yourself, besides how are you gonna make me leave exactly, talking me out of here?
You can't even control your own immigration flow, and people from abroad who bother studying and making a career come here and get your best jobs.. you're lazy, you don't vote, you don't understand the importance of your own rights and you bark at the people who try to instill some good sense in your sheep mentality.. as I said before, you're the worst England. Uh, and I'm not telling you this as an Italian, I'm telling you this as a worker and taxpayer, who holds the same rights and duties as you do (and I do bother to vote), regardless of where I'm coming from.

What happens is people die. Apple can afford to restock their shop. Or is money more important than life?

yeah, people die anyway, as for your brilliant equation, it's not money that is more important than life, but it's respect for laws and above all self-respect. What kind of low life scum idiot does what we saw happening? Someone we surely won't miss.

Bull. Utterly wrong. (And I take it the 'we' you mean you)

Your air of superiority is palpable.

Utterly wrong, why? Elaborate.
I don't feel superior, in the end of the day we're all human beings, I think it's you who's starting to feel inferior, since you got all aggressive..

[Bewolf]

If I listen to my inner child, I can more then understand this fascination with guns. As a mature adult however, I can't.

A gun is a tool made for killing. That is it's sole purpose. The only way a gun thus makes sense is that killing is acceptable under certain conditions in any given society. Once that line of thinking is established, it is rather easy for people to justify their own reasons for using deadly force. That applies to criminals as much as to people defending themselves.

This whole debate is questionably a debate between instinct and rationals.
Instinct dictates the right for defence of home, family and one's own life without trusting others or institutions to do that job. THat is an emotion I can more then understand.

However, Rational dictates to ban killing outright (including the death penalty) and a ban on tools for killing is a logical consequence. At first glance this may look naive, as there always will be people willing to use deadly force. However, a) emotional barriers will be higher (yes, it does make a difference for people if you told them as a child that it is ok to use deadly force in some circumstances opposite to telling them that killing is wrong, period)

and b) a lack of tools for that purpose makes it quite a bit harder from a purely physical PoV.

It's a simple matter of maths. Ban on firearms=fewer firearms=fewer kills. The individual may feel more unsafe without lethal means for defense, but that person is also much less likely to be confronted with a firearm.

That said, there are some grave differences between the US and the UK; or any other european country for that matter. In the US there is a lot of space for people to spread out. In Europe there is not. And the fewer space there is for a society to spread out, the more there is a need for compromise.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

If I listen to my inner child, I can more then understand this fascination with guns. As a mature adult however, I can't.

A gun is a tool made for killing. That is it's sole purpose. The only way a gun thus makes sense is that killing is acceptable under certain conditions in any given society. Once that line of thinking is established, it is rather easy for people to justify their own reasons for using deadly force. That applies to criminals as much as to people defending themselves.

This whole debate is questionably a debate between instinct and rationals.
Instinct dictates the right for defence of home, family and one's own life without trusting others or institutions to do that job. THat is an emotion I can more then understand.

However, Rational dictates to ban killing outright (including the death penalty) and a ban on tools for killing is a logical consequence. At first glance this may look naive, as there always will be people willing to use deadly force. However, a) emotional barriers will be higher (yes, it does make a difference for people if you told them as a child that it is ok to use deadly force in some circumstances opposite to telling them that killing is wrong, period)

and b) a lack of tools for that purpose makes it quite a bit harder from a purely physical PoV.

It's a simple matter of maths. Ban on firearms=fewer firearms=fewer kills. The individual may feel more unsafe without lethal means for defense, but that person is also much less likely to be confronted with a firearm.

That said, there are some grave differences between the US and the UK; or any other european country for that matter. In the US there is a lot of space for people to spread out. In Europe there is not. And the fewer space there is for a society to spread out, the more there is a need for compromise.

bewolf, people get killed regardless of firearms, if someone wants to kill, he/she still will do it, with or without a gun.

Following your idea we shouldn't even have armies, nor embark in things like invading other countries for "peacekeeping". This kind of societal hypocrisy really annoys me.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Pudfark

I just can't resist.....

And the one without the gun?
Gets to squeal like a piggy......

So you want to sodomise someone at gun point. Says it all really, probably following on the family tradition.



Stern, I think you're really missing the point. So I live near Manchester, I'm not putting it down - it's just a place like a lot of others. Look at your earlier posts for the reason why I posted that.

As for online independent broadcasters - they are of course trustworthy and their information is of course accurate and untainted by editorial bias. Try and make your own opinion rather than regurgitating others, or getting sucked into conspiracy rubbish.

For the monarchy, read up on the Civil List like I suggested, then comment on salaries and the like. Regardless of how you look at it the UK has a good deal.

As for leaving the country, why would you want to? After all, you came here as do many many others. There must be some reason for that (quick, trot out stuff about lax immigration and easy benefits etc). Presumably you saw opportunities not available in your own country, but of course if you went home you'd just be a sheep talking Italian, with a corrupt prime minister and a huge national debt. A great country to be your role model.

I was offered an Italian WW2 rifle once. Never fired and only dropped once. Bargain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...United_Kingdom

Interesting read - no idea if it's accurate though.

I don't think I'll be back to this thread as I'll only get ruder. It's been fun but it's just tiresome now. ta ta

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Hood

So you want to sodomise someone at gun point. Says it all really, probably following on the family tradition.



Stern, I think you're really missing the point. So I live near Manchester, I'm not putting it down - it's just a place like a lot of others. Look at your earlier posts for the reason why I posted that.

As for online independent broadcasters - they are of course trustworthy and their information is of course accurate and untainted by editorial bias. Try and make your own opinion rather than regurgitating others, or getting sucked into conspiracy rubbish.

opinions must be based on facts, otherwise it's just blabber.

For the monarchy, read up on the Civil List like I suggested, then comment on salaries and the like. Regardless of how you look at it the UK has a good deal.

you could even have a better deal, but it's your choice not to see it. I'm cool with that, dont get me wrong, it's just a bit too much of an expensive tradition, esp in such dire times.

As for leaving the country, why would you want to? After all, you came here as do many many others. There must be some reason for that (quick, trot out stuff about lax immigration and easy benefits etc). Presumably you saw opportunities not available in your own country, but of course if you went home you'd just be a sheep talking Italian, with a corrupt prime minister and a huge national debt. A great country to be your role model.

I came here for personal reasons, not professional, but there are many others that do. It's a great country and I like the overall spirit. Yes, it's not perfect, but which country is? To me it's just appalling to see a country that was capable of such great things during the two world wars that turned into a well different reality.

I was offered an Italian WW2 rifle once. Never fired and only dropped once. Bargain.

yeah, you think it's the first time I heard that one? Or that Italian tanks had 1 gear forward and 46 reverse, or that the Italian Army in WW2 was the only one with sunburnt armpits? That's your humour, patronising and condescending. I've heard many say it's you that won the Battle of Britain, some even still believe you won WW2 (and not the Americans), heck you even made fun of brave Polish fighters who joined your country to fight against the Nazis for years, until someone said it wasn't politically correct anymore..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...United_Kingdom

Interesting read - no idea if it's accurate though.
[/quote]
it is indeed, nonsense at its finest.

I don't think I'll be back to this thread as I'll only get ruder. It's been fun but it's just tiresome now. ta ta

you'll be sorely missed, cheerio.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

bewolf, people get killed regardless of firearms, if someone wants to kill, he/she still will do it, with or without a gun.

Following your idea we shouldn't even have armies, nor embark in things like invading other countries for "peacekeeping". This kind of societal hypocrisy really annoys me.

That would imply that all killing was planned and intentional. It also implies that using physical force or careful planning as a means to kill a perosn is as likely as simply having to pull a trigger as a result of the situation. That's a very narrow view on gun crime. Or any crime involving a dead person in the end, eventually.

And please spare me that army argument. We actually should disband them indeed. The countries with the largest track record of starting wars are western countries, between each other and most of the rest of the world at one point or the other. That hardly is a good defense for defense.

Besides, hardly a criminal considers himself "evil" or a "bad person". Neither do nations. All have their in their own eyes legit reason for the crimes they comit. The only "good" guy is the one who stands in the end with a smoking gun.

Just to make this clear, I do think that there are situations where one must fight, risking one's own life and for that having the means to win. But these situations do not apply to everyday life.