water cannon

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by winny

Very patronising, thanks.
Basically I just don't want more lethal weapons in the UK. I'm quite happy with the current laws.

I'm sorry man, but guns are still legally imported in the UK everyday.

I have kids, It's a personal choice, I've not been swayed by anyone.
I'm not particularly anti gun, just happy with the way things are.

so is it because you're afraid for your children? I'm afraid for my children too, but it's not fear of firearms, they're the last of my concerns, I'm afraid of the shallowness of our society, of paedos, of poor education, of wrong values.

I'm sorry, and I'm not taking the mick, it's still not clear why you're against firearms.

I'm very aware of what the government is trying to do, thanks. They are regulating firearms. I'm not affected by it so I'm not bothered.

No they haven't, in fact they haven't changed a thing after the Cumbria shooting, which was quite surprising to me actually. Please if you have time and really care about the topic, spend some time reading the regulations.

Alcohol? Did prohibition not happen in your world?
If you want to see democracy in action try banning Alcohol in the UK...
-Never gonna happen-

I am not talking about prohibitionism, I'm talking about a campaign like the one against smoke, why doesn't that happen? Please answer to this, because as a non-British citizen I struggle to understand the self-destructive attitude of binge drinking. Brits have one of the most driven and effective ways of gathering together and make things happen, but why it happens only for certain things? Alcohol has done way more victims than any gun massacre, still it's acceptable in our society.

Grow a pair sonny? Who do you think you're talking to? That's just offensive and patronising and takes no account of who I am. You are very judgemental.

it was meant as a provocation, as I'm sure you know. I knew it wasn't the case, and wasn't actually directed at you, if you got offended I apologise.

I wasn't particularly shocked no.
1st time it happend I was in a Post office, I was a customer, armed robbers came in, they had a sawn off, I just did what I was told.

2nd time was an attempted mugging. I didn't get shot, he didn't get my wallet. I think I broke his jaw but I didn't hang around to find out.

I had similar experiences, plus my time in the Army, when I've been under fire in several occasions (once even under friendly fire, by far the most frustrating experience). It's life, and one wishes it would never happen, or if it did, that you can tell the story, but again, it has no connection with my will to possess firearms, I could have been in a life threatening situation under a knife, a bat or 20 folks, it doesn't matter the mean, it's the perpetrators.

One of the things I've done in my life and that I'm very grateful for is following a Krav Maga course, and I (unfortunately) put it to use in 3 different situations. Of these three, only one was under a firearm threat, and I've surprised myself on how quickly I reacted. I was at a light with my window down, a guy runs towards me as he was crossing the road and points a gun at my face shouting me to get out: I raised my hands, quickly grabbed the pistol and pushed it towards my windscreen, jamming it with his hand between my window and the windscreen, then moved forward until he let go.

I drove to the closest police station, got in and handed what I only then realised was a blank firing gun.

We all have our horror stories, that's why I prefer living in the quiet British countryside.

What? Are you serious? The reson we are havng this argument is because I posted an opinion that differed to yours. Which you then jumped all over me for! I've been patronised, disrespected, called names, had my intelligence questioned all by you because I dont agree with you. You should read your own advice. You are the very definition of hypocrisy. I never once said you were wrong. I just accept your opinion and carry on with mine.

nananah, look back man, look how you delivered your opinion.

I don't see why I should have to defend and justify my position on this to someone I don't know. I'm entitled to my opinion.

Are you really telling me you can't even defend your own opinion to a stranger?

As for freedom, what freedom? there are 100's of laws you must abide to.
Do we just change or get rid of the ones you don't like? Why not get rid of them all then we'll all be 100% free.

the good old saying "my freedom ends where yours begins" still applies, the society we live in is just the referee for this match called life.

Guns or no Guns is a question of preference, not right and wrong. You have tried to turn it into right and wrong and have been pretty offensive too.

You would not act this way if I was in the room.

there is right and wrong in everything, it's all about validating the two sides. And I would still defend my ideas, being in the same room would actually help, since I find communicating via forum extremely frustrating and mutilated in terms of quality. We might argue, we might agree or agree to disagree, who knows. I can come to Manchester (my fav pub is there) and talk with you about guns, aeroplanes and rights, but I'd rather talk about these things than pretend it's all ok in our society.

You still haven't told me why a Spitfire is better than an Enfield.

[von Pilsner]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

there is right and wrong in everything, it's all about validating the two sides.

Many problems do have more than one solution and not all answers are correct for everyone.

If the guy likes the current laws in the UK then he likes them, it does not make his opinion wrong or bad.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by von Pilsner

Many problems do have more than one solution and not all answers are correct for everyone.

If the guy likes the current laws in the UK then he likes them, it does not make his opinion wrong or bad.

I agree, but mine is honest curiosity, it's my curious nature, I want to understand and compare with my position.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm sorry man, but guns are still legally imported in the UK everyday.

Thank you for finally talking to me like I'm an adult.
I know guns are imported, I'm not (as you may have thought) stupid.
I know that the main route into Manchester for Guns in the 80's and 90's was through the use of baggage handelrs at Manchester airport who were also being paid by the gangs. I know you can't stop it.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

so is it because you're afraid for your children? I'm afraid for my children too, but it's not fear of firearms, they're the last of my concerns, I'm afraid of the shallowness of our society, of paedos, of poor education, of wrong values.

I'm sorry, and I'm not taking the mick, it's still not clear why you're against firearms.

I can't put it any simpler than I just don't like them (Don't get me wrong, I have a bookshelf full of Millitary history, firearms history, etc.. I undersand thier millitary value). I just don't like the fact that a machine designed to kill people could be made more easily available for use by the general public.

I'm sorry that this 'catch all' law means you can't shoot stuff, but for every responsible firearms person there will be someone who isn't as responsible.

I share the same concerns,but you're assuming I'm 'against' firearms, I'm not. I just don't see the need for anyone to own a semi or fully automatic weapon in the UK, or a handgun for that matter.
If anything I'd like to see illegal possesion more firmly punnished.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

No they haven't, in fact they haven't changed a thing after the Cumbria shooting, which was quite surprising to me actually. Please if you have time and really care about the topic, spend some time reading the regulations.

Eh? you say they don't regulate firearms then tell me to read the regulations..?

I don't care a lot about this topic. The reason I'm still here is because of the way you spoke to me, not to change your mind or to have mine changed.
I'm standing up for myself.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I am not talking about prohibitionism, I'm talking about a campaign like the one against smoke, why doesn't that happen? Please answer to this, because as a non-British citizen I struggle to understand the self-destructive attitude of binge drinking. Brits have one of the most driven and effective ways of gathering together and make things happen, but why it happens only for certain things? Alcohol has done way more victims than any gun massacre, still it's acceptable in our society.

I cannot explain the British attitude to alcohol. It baffles me. It's a symptom of the same problem that caused the looting sprees, no prospects, no interest in the future, no concept of consequence and selfishness. There is a real 'screw you, I'll do what I want' attitude around at the moment.
Again we're off track here.. The British are a strangley self destructive race, I don't know why.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

One of the things I've done in my life and that I'm very grateful for is following a Krav Maga course, and I (unfortunately) put it to use in 3 different situations. Of these three, only one was under a firearm threat, and I've surprised myself on how quickly I reacted. I was at a light with my window down, a guy runs towards me as he was crossing the road and points a gun at my face shouting me to get out: I raised my hands, quickly grabbed the pistol and pushed it towards my windscreen, jamming it with his hand between my window and the windscreen, then moved forward until he let go

.

I just got lucky with my experience. I just tried the whole " I'll do what you want, just relax and don't shoot me" I also asked that he leave me my wallet and take the money and cards as the wallet was a gift from my dead mother (it was a gif but she's not dead!) I was basically trying to get him to slow down a bit so I could think..

He looked over his shoulder as he was taking the cards out of my wallet and at that point I just thought that if he looked over his shoulder again I'd hit him as hard and as fast as I could. He looked over his shoulder again and I ended up with a broken hand

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Are you really telling me you can't even defend your own opinion to a stranger?

No, what I meant was I don't need to justify myself, you questioned my intelligence and my ability to make informed decisions.. My opinion is out there now.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

there is right and wrong in everything, it's all about validating the two sides. And I would still defend my ideas, being in the same room would actually help, since I find communicating via forum extremely frustrating and mutilated in terms of quality. We might argue, we might agree or agree to disagree, who knows. I can come to Manchester (my fav pub is there) and talk with you about guns, aeroplanes and rights, but I'd rather talk about these things than pretend it's all ok in our society.

There is not right and wrong in everything. Is a pencil right or wrong? Or a duck? And who's right and wrong are we using? Yours or mine? (they may differ)

There is no right and wrong with guns. You've used the argument that guns are neither good nor bad, yet you're quite happy to put right and wrong into use when talking about them. Gun usage can never be classified by using such emotive terms as 'right and wrong'. Necessary or not necessary is the ony criteria.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

You still haven't told me why a Spitfire is better than an Enfield.

I dunno..
Because a Sitfire is a classic WW2 Warbird (which I like) and Enfield is a London borough (which I'm not as keen on)?

I'll sum up.. You like to own guns, I don't see the need to own one. You see the regulations as erroding your freedom. I just see it as another bit of legislation that doesn't affect me in any way.

Guess what, we probably like different foods, and football teams, and TV shows,

To say that you jumped all over my post because of the way I said it just sounds like a poor excuse for some poor behaviour.

All I said was I don't want more guns.

Can we move on now?

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by winny

Thank you for finally talking to me like I'm an adult.
I know guns are imported, I'm not (as you may have thought) stupid.
I know that the main route into Manchester for Guns in the 80's and 90's was through the use of baggage handelrs at Manchester airport who were also being paid by the gangs. I know you can't stop it.

I'm sorry if it all came out as patronising, it's a cultural thing I'm afraid, nothing personal, this is the way we talk in Italy and we don't mean to be patronising, but it comes out differently and the forum medium doesn't help either. You can't stop it mainly cos it's embarrassingly easy to smuggle stuff through, not in airports, but everywhere else.

I can't put it any simpler than I just don't like them (Don't get me wrong, I have a bookshelf full of Millitary history, firearms history, etc.. I undersand thier millitary value). I just don't like the fact that a machine designed to kill people could be made more easily available for use by the general public.

ok, so you obviously find firearms fascinating but don't want the responsibility of having one in your household. Is that correct?

I'm sorry that this 'catch all' law means you can't shoot stuff, but for every responsible firearms person there will be someone who isn't as responsible.

It's ok, I still enjoy using all my firearms when I'm back in Italy, it's not big deal to me, but I take several British friends to the shooting range, and they all were impressed by the culture and above all how there's pretty much no difference between a bolt action and semiauto rifle. The Enfield in particular, because of its spring loaded bolt action, is renown for its so called "mad minute", in which experienced shooters can deliver an impressive 30 rounds per minute hitting a target at 200 yards (the record, back in 1914, is of 3. Then again, a rimfire .22cal version of the ColtM4 or Car15 is available for sale, and that is too incredibly lethal.

I share the same concerns,but you're assuming I'm 'against' firearms, I'm not. I just don't see the need for anyone to own a semi or fully automatic weapon in the UK, or a handgun for that matter.
If anything I'd like to see illegal possesion more firmly punnished.

for the semiauto see above, for the full auto I have a mixed feeling. The destructive potential of an automatic machine gun is big, there could be stricter regulations like you're not authorised to leave the shooting range with it (many shooting ranges offer the possibility to keep your firearms safely stored in their premises). Mind you, regulations on transportation are really strict: whenever you're travelling, the gun can't be in the cabin with you, it needs to be in the boot with its bolt disassembled. Ammunition need to be with you at all time, not with the gun, pistols need to be disassembled on their main components etc.. again, this is the regulation in Europe.

Eh? you say they don't regulate firearms then tell me to read the regulations..?

I meant they didn't go for further restrictions on firearms after the Cumbria shooting, which surprised me a bit.

I don't care a lot about this topic. The reason I'm still here is because of the way you spoke to me, not to change your mind or to have mine changed.
I'm standing up for myself.



I cannot explain the British attitude to alcohol. It baffles me. It's a symptom of the same problem that caused the looting sprees, no prospects, no interest in the future, no concept of consequence and selfishness. There is a real 'screw you, I'll do what I want' attitude around at the moment.
Again we're off track here.. The British are a strangley self destructive race, I don't know why.

yeah, it's the double standard attitude that I don't get. Again, alcohol causes, directly or indirectly, loads of victims every year, but there's no public condemnation of it. Probably because it's too much of a business, like cars.. there's no real interest for the Government for your health, they just need to give the politically correct buff here and there, attacking easy minorities like gun collectors, whilst spending £1billion for a war that makes no sense in Afghanistan.. go figure!

I just got lucky with my experience. I just tried the whole " I'll do what you want, just relax and don't shoot me" I also asked that he leave me my wallet and take the money and cards as the wallet was a gift from my dead mother (it was a gif but she's not dead!) I was basically trying to get him to slow down a bit so I could think..

He looked over his shoulder as he was taking the cards out of my wallet and at that point I just thought that if he looked over his shoulder again I'd hit him as hard and as fast as I could. He looked over his shoulder again and I ended up with a broken hand

yeah, that was a dangerous reaction but fortunately for you it worked if this kind of crime is common in your area, I would really recommend to follow a Krav Maga course, it was developed by the Mossad and it's a very effective, no-nonsense defence technique.

There is not right and wrong in everything. Is a pencil right or wrong? Or a duck? And who's right and wrong are we using? Yours or mine? (they may differ)

There is no right and wrong with guns. You've used the argument that guns are neither good nor bad, yet you're quite happy to put right and wrong into use when talking about them. Gun usage can never be classified by using such emotive terms as 'right and wrong'. Necessary or not necessary is the ony criteria.

Exactly, there's no right or wrong in things, it's the use that we make of them that is either right or wrong (which then again is subjective). As you said, there's nothing wrong with guns, what's wrong is the regulations and controls on the licensing. So the Government should fix that instead of prohibit them altogether.

I dunno..
Because a Sitfire is a classic WW2 Warbird (which I like) and Enfield is a London borough (which I'm not as keen on)?

I'll tell you why, because the Spitfire became a symbol of propaganda, the Enfield instead, which served your countries for 2 world wars, was just a rifle.. there's never been glamour about firearms, but that's what won the war, a Spitfire was armed with machine guns and cannons, not good intentions. That's the "society hypocrisy" that I'm talking about.

I'll sum up.. You like to own guns, I don't see the need to own one. You see the regulations as erroding your freedom. I just see it as another bit of legislation that doesn't affect me in any way.

Guess what, we probably like different foods, and football teams, and TV shows,

To say that you jumped all over my post because of the way I said it just sounds like a poor excuse for some poor behaviour.

All I said was I don't want more guns.

Can we move on now?

exactly, it doesn't affect you, but you should express sympathy to other citizens like you who are deprived of a right, and I mean this in a broad sense, not just related to firearms.

Of course we can move on, I'm sorry again if I came out very blunt in some bits, but my point is that as much as I respect other people's opinion, I want to understand where they come from, not just take them for granted and get them shoved down my throat, like the government does here.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

I'm sorry if it all came out as patronising, it's a cultural thing I'm afraid, nothing personal, this is the way we talk in Italy and we don't mean to be patronising, but it comes out differently and the forum medium doesn't help either. You can't stop it mainly cos it's embarrassingly easy to smuggle stuff through, not in airports, but everywhere else.


ok, so you obviously find firearms fascinating but don't want the responsibility of having one in your household. Is that correct?


It's ok, I still enjoy using all my firearms when I'm back in Italy, it's not big deal to me, but I take several British friends to the shooting range, and they all were impressed by the culture and above all how there's pretty much no difference between a bolt action and semiauto rifle. The Enfield in particular, because of its spring loaded bolt action, is renown for its so called "mad minute", in which experienced shooters can deliver an impressive 30 rounds per minute hitting a target at 200 yards (the record, back in 1914, is of 3. Then again, a rimfire .22cal version of the ColtM4 or Car15 is available for sale, and that is too incredibly lethal.


for the semiauto see above, for the full auto I have a mixed feeling. The destructive potential of an automatic machine gun is big, there could be stricter regulations like you're not authorised to leave the shooting range with it (many shooting ranges offer the possibility to keep your firearms safely stored in their premises). Mind you, regulations on transportation are really strict: whenever you're travelling, the gun can't be in the cabin with you, it needs to be in the boot with its bolt disassembled. Ammunition need to be with you at all time, not with the gun, pistols need to be disassembled on their main components etc.. again, this is the regulation in Europe.


I meant they didn't go for further restrictions on firearms after the Cumbria shooting, which surprised me a bit.


yeah, it's the double standard attitude that I don't get. Again, alcohol causes, directly or indirectly, loads of victims every year, but there's no public condemnation of it. Probably because it's too much of a business, like cars.. there's no real interest for the Government for your health, they just need to give the politically correct buff here and there, attacking easy minorities like gun collectors, whilst spending £1billion for a war that makes no sense in Afghanistan.. go figure!



yeah, that was a dangerous reaction but fortunately for you it worked if this kind of crime is common in your area, I would really recommend to follow a Krav Maga course, it was developed by the Mossad and it's a very effective, no-nonsense defence technique.


Exactly, there's no right or wrong in things, it's the use that we make of them that is either right or wrong (which then again is subjective). As you said, there's nothing wrong with guns, what's wrong is the regulations and controls on the licensing. So the Government should fix that instead of prohibit them altogether.


I'll tell you why, because the Spitfire became a symbol of propaganda, the Enfield instead, which served your countries for 2 world wars, was just a rifle.. there's never been glamour about firearms, but that's what won the war, a Spitfire was armed with machine guns and cannons, not good intentions. That's the "society hypocrisy" that I'm talking about.



exactly, it doesn't affect you, but you should express sympathy to other citizens like you who are deprived of a right, and I mean this in a broad sense, not just related to firearms.

Of course we can move on, I'm sorry again if I came out very blunt in some bits, but my point is that as much as I respect other people's opinion, I want to understand where they come from, not just take them for granted and get them shoved down my throat, like the government does here.

No problem, I like a good (civil) debate.

[ATAG_Doc]

I was only an average debater in school growing up. I just could never seem to master the technique.

[Wolf_Rider]

Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.

- Mohandas Gandhi

[unreasonable]

Originally Posted by timej31

I was only an average debater in school growing up. I just could never seem to master the technique.

I find it hard to believe that 24 hours have gone by and no-one has yet succumbed to the temptation to say that based on the reasoning of your posts surely you must have been a master debater!