Do you own a gun?

[GepperRankins]

instincts tend to take over in a surprise confrontation, a planned confrontation in fact.

so intelligence doesn't really mean shit, especially not the long words type

[RPerry]

so you rather risk i'd guess a 40/40 chance of dying in a shoot-out with a burglar than the, i'd guess drastically lower chance that an armed child molestor coming to rape your daughter. a daughter which you don't have because theres no-one under 31 in your house remember

thats right, I would take a chance of being shot by anyone armed that walked into my home. I would probably stand better than a 40/40 chance though, dumb bastard will be busy with the dogs for awhile :P

[MCHeshPants420]

thedave & RPerry: What's a 40/40 chance?:blink:

[RPerry]

thedave & RPerry: What's a 40/40 chance?:blink:

I'm not sure, I figured he couldn't count to 100 ? :D

[GepperRankins]

40% you die 40% they die 20% other

[Snee]

It's what you get when you subtract the 20% chance of getting ice cream with your next purchase.

It's a new burglary-drive they've got going.

[RPerry]

40% you die 40% they die 20% other

because of the dogs, I'm willing to bet there's a 90% chance I won't have to fire. the other 10% I will attribute to the possibility that the intruder fires at the dogs instead of running. :(

[Busyman]

Saying that I am not capable of protecting my family and that my late Father was not a proper role model wasn't particularly nice either.

I'm just looking after mine the best way I can, based on the environment I live in and know. Which appears to be entirely different from yours.
Well.....you started it. :dry:

:P

[Snee]

Incidentally, the chance of the burglars being a squad of ninja assassins is fairly slim.

Just so no one gets worried.

[Busyman]

Incidentally, the chance of the burglars being a squad of ninja assassins is fairly slim.

Just so no one gets worried.
:blink:

[Snee]

Wouldn't want to get you any more nervous than you already are.

[RPerry]

Incidentally, the chance of the burglars being a squad of ninja assassins is fairly slim.

Just so no one gets worried.

No ninjas I'm sure, but these assholes killed for a game system

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-volusia-deltonamurders,1,3852275.storygallery?coll=orl-news-utility&ctrack=1&cset=true

[Snee]

I'm sure that would be an interesting article, if I had a subscription to the Orlando sentinel I probably could read it too. :blink:

Mind copying and pasting?

[Busyman]

because of the dogs, I'm willing to bet there's a 90% chance I won't have to fire. the other 10% I will attribute to the possibility that the intruder fires at the dogs instead of running. :(
I don't have dogs but my alarm will go off.

I then go to my family, call the police, and train the gun on the door leading into the room.

Tbh any person that walks past an alarm sign, breaks in, then stays to fuck around during a piercing alarm has to be an idiot.

The chance of me having to really shoot is very small and frankly he deserves a shot in the ass...(or maybe he just got off a boat from the UK and thinks I'll be diplo-matical about it). :dry:

[RPerry]

I'm sure that would be an interesting article, if I had a subscription to the Orlando sentinel I probably could read it too. :blink:

Posted August 7, 2004, 10:32 PM EDT



DELTONA -- Police questioned two roommates described as "persons of interest" but not suspects today in the deaths of six friends found scattered through a blood-spattered house Friday in what Volusia County's sheriff called "the worst thing that we've ever seen."

One man held on a probation violation "had some knowledge of some of the victims," said Sheriff Ben Johnson. The other man agreed to accompany investigators. The sheriff said they were "somewhat" cooperative.

The victims, four men and two women, were discovered about 6:30 a.m. after one of the victims failed to show up for the morning shift at a nearby Burger King where five of the victims worked.

Five of the six victims have been identified. They are Michelle Ann Nathan, 19, Jonathan Gleason, 18, and Anthony Vega, 34, all of Deltona, Francisco Roman, 30, of Lowell, Mass. and Roberto Gonzalez, 28, of Beacon, N.Y.

Also today, forensic experts from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement began to examine bloodstains at the house. There was so much to analyze that the task could take up to 18 hours, said sheriff's spokesman Brandon Haught.

In a statement Saturday, Burger King Corp. said it was "deeply saddened by the events that occurred in Deltona" and that the "franchisee is working with local authorities" to help investigators. The restaurant three miles from the crime scene posted a sign that read "Closed. Reopening Monday." One of the entrances was sealed off with yellow police tape.

A morning downpour thinned the numbers of neighbors, relatives and onlookers that had been gathered in front of the house a day earlier. However, one visitor left a bouquet of white roses with baby's breath on the front lawn. Beside it, another person left a note that read: "There really are monsters among us."

It was the deadliest mass killing in Central Florida in more than a decade, and police said the killer, or killers, were still on the loose.

this is a short version, but what it boiled down to was a few guys decided to kill these people wth baseball bats over what amounted to a playstation or an xbox. the case continues on, the killers were obviously caught, I just can't but wonder if they could have saved themselves if they were armed.

[Busyman]

Wouldn't want to get you any more nervous than you already are.
Dude I have been in room full-o-folks that packed guns and couldn't have been in the least bit nervous.

They all had "instant death" in their coats. :dry:

[Snee]

Rob: was that the article where they beat the kid (and his friends) to death 'cos he'd stolen an x-box and some other stuff?

No one fucks with their stuff, I guess.

[RPerry]

Rob: was that the article where they beat the kid (and his friends) to death 'cos he'd stolen an x-box and some other stuff?

No one fucks with their stuff, I guess.

The stuff wasn't stolen, these men were actually in the house without permission of the owner and left the stuff behind.

Surely after all these arguments about handguns and such, you wouldn't justify 6 murders with " No one fucks with their stuff, I guess." would you ? :blink:

[Busyman]

Posted August 7, 2004, 10:32 PM EDT




this is a short version, but what it boiled down to was a few guys decided to kill these people wth baseball bats over what amounted to a playstation or an xbox. the case continues on, the killers were obviously caught, I just can't but wonder if they could have saved themselves if they were armed.
Damn!!! When I hear about shit like that it shows me that there is something wrong with society, child rearing, whateverthefuck.

The world is getting worse.

I notice how folk focus on Columbine yet we've had our gun laws for years before that shooting incident.

[Snee]

@rob: No I wouldn't, however, according to the article I found, they believed that one of the victims had stolen the item(s), and that was the reason they had for attacking.

It's mad as hell, but it sounds like they armed themselves to protect/retrieve their property.


Troy Victorino, 28, has been accused of leading the attack, which police say was prompted by his belief that victim Erin Belanger had stolen an Xbox video game system and other items he had left in her grandmother's nearby vacant house. Victorino had turned the Providence Boulevard home into a neighborhood party spot, investigators and neighbors have said.

source (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-locmassacre17121704dec17,1,5476406.story?coll=orl-news-utility&ctrack=1&cset=true)

Worked through google but the link may not work from here.

[RPerry]

Damn!!! When I hear about shit like that it shows me that there is something wrong with society, child rearing, whateverthefuck.

The world is getting worse.

I notice how folk focus on Columbine yet we've had our gun laws for years before that shooting incident.

Agreed. This is alot of what I was saying with my post the other day. Take away the guns, add other problems. Things have got to start in the home and schools, and parents need to be involved with both. It won't stop all of the problems, but I'm sure it will help.

[vidcc]

I've see a lot of houses that have iron bars on the windows and iron security doors which make it impossible for an intruder to gain access without some pretty heavy tools, even then the occupants would be alerted by the noise and the resulting 911 would get the law enforcers on the scene before the would be intruder had chance to gain access. So there is an alternative to protect the occupants. Heck if I lived in an area that bad I would install a panic room rather than a gun, but then I am fortunate to be able to choose where I live and would choose not to live anywhere I would need to take any such action.

It could be argued that if one has methods that effectively prohibit access then to not use them but instead hold deadly weapon for protection that one is somehow "spoiling for a fight" :rolleyes:

[RPerry]

@rob: No I wouldn't, however, according to the article I found, they believed that one of the victims had stolen the item(s), and that was the reason they had for attacking.

It's mad as hell, but it sounds like they armed themselves to protect/retrieve their property.



source (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/volusia/orl-locmassacre17121704dec17,1,5476406.story?coll=orl-news-utility&ctrack=1&cset=true)

Worked through google but the link may not work from here.

If you read that closely, believed stole items he left

He left the items when he was asked to leave, the items were not stolen, that was his excuse for his actions, but remember, that case is some 9 months old,
and occured in Central Florida where I live, so I see bits on the news frequently

[RPerry]

I've see a lot of houses that have iron bars on the windows and iron security doors which make it impossible for an intruder to gain access without some pretty heavy tools, even then the occupants would be alerted by the noise and the resulting 911 would get the law enforcers on the scene before the would be intruder had chance to gain access. So there is an alternative to protect the occupants. Heck if I lived in an area that bad I would install a panic room rather than a gun, but then I am fortunate to be able to choose where I live and would choose not to live anywhere I would need to take any such action.

It could be argued that if one has methods that effectively prohibit access then to not use them but instead hold deadly weapon for protection that one is somehow "spoiling for a fight" :rolleyes:

The story I posted above is not in a bad area, this is a typical story from anytown, USA. It just happens to be close enough to where I live that it made the top story

[Snee]

oic

[RPerry]

Had stolen items he (the attacker, is how I read it) had left in his grandmother's vacant house.

?

That's what the cops thought was the reason.

Snny, please read that article more carefully. he said left in her grandmothers vacant house The house was not vacant, it was her ( Erin's ) grandparents vacation house. The guys had broken in thinking nobody would be there, and when someone did appear and they were asked to leave, the rest of the story happened within a couple days

[Snee]

d'oh

You are right.

It still isn't anything like a regular burglary though.


Bunch of armed psychos in a death squad of sorts.

[Busyman]

Agreed. This is alot of what I was saying with my post the other day. Take away the guns, add other problems. Things have got to start in the home and schools, and parents need to be involved with both. It won't stop all of the problems, but I'm sure it will help.
Even in hobbes graph, we lead in non-firearm homicides (by a smaller margin nevertheless)

[GepperRankins]

Agreed. This is alot of what I was saying with my post the other day. Take away the guns, add other problems. Things have got to start in the home and schools, and parents need to be involved with both. It won't stop all of the problems, but I'm sure it will help.
http://worldpolicy.org/globalrights/usa/firearms-homicides.gif

guns are a major problem that wouldn't just be replaced if they were outlawed. look at the graph. i'm sure some of the shooting victims wouldn't have died had they been beaten up rather than just shot.

[Busyman]

d'oh

You are right.

It still isn't anything like a regular burglary though.


Bunch of armed psychos in a death squad of sorts.
As a victim, who knows what's going to be a regular burglary? :huh:

[GepperRankins]

As a victim, who knows what's going to be a regular burglary? :huh:
you risk it. i'd rather risk it over hightening the risk involved in a regular burglary

[vidcc]

The story I posted above is not in a bad area, this is a typical story from anytown, USA. It just happens to be close enough to where I live that it made the top story
I remember it from the news (if it's the same story)

I was commenting on the whole "but this is America not the Uk" theme. Given any bad thing happening we often see people being interviewed on the news saying things like "you just don't expect this sort of thing to happen here" so while I agree that NO place is safe I am referring to living in a place where such things as bars and guns would be considered "prudent" in daily life...if I was walking in Bagdad's streets I would wear body armour just to be prudent...if I took the same precaution here I would be silly... It's just about cost assessment if that makes sense.

[Snee]

Errm dave, they used pipes and baseball bats.



But rob, while a gun might have done some difference, there's no guarantee it had done anything for the victims, this was a whole gang of people attacking them. This was also a planned attack quite possibly with possible defensive measures in mind, it's quite odd that the police didn't do anything before it happened, judging by the report.

Big mistake there.

This is exceptional even for your country I think, judging by the media interest.


@busy: This may have been one of them situations we talked about where nothing would have saved the victims.

And the odds of it happening to you are incredibly small.

[Busyman]

you risk it. i'd rather risk it over hightening the risk involved in a regular burglary
My risk equals I stay alive. Your risk equals whatever the burglar decides to do with you.

As I said, in my house a burglar has plenty of chances to leave or not step foot in the house in the first place.

My gun ownership is otherwise irrelevent. :dry:

[Snee]

My risk equals I stay alive. Your risk equals whatever the burglar decides to do with you.
We already went through this once.

Now dave's gonna' say something along the lines of "unless pointing the gun at someone is what makes them kill you when they'd otherwise left you alone".

[Busyman]

Errm dave, they used pipes and baseball bats.



But rob, while a gun might have done some difference, there's no guarantee it had done anything for the victims, this was a whole gang of people attacking them. This was also a planned attack quite possibly with possible defensive measures in mind, it's quite odd that the police didn't do anything before it happened, judging by the report.

Big mistake there.

This is exceptional even for your country I think, judging by the media interest.


@busy: This may have been one of them situations we talked about where nothing would have saved the victims.

And the odds of it happening to you are incredibly small.
Agreed.

They also had no weapon to do shit with since it was nonexistent.

I would try my best to scamper to 1 of 6. I still may not make it.

Gotta try though. ;)

[RPerry]

http://worldpolicy.org/globalrights/usa/firearms-homicides.gif

guns are a major problem that wouldn't just be replaced if they were outlawed. look at the graph. i'm sure some of the shooting victims wouldn't have died had they been beaten up rather than just shot.

the one thing that graph doesn't show is who the killer/victim is. You do realize that most of the firearm problem is gang and/or drug related ?

[Busyman]

We already went through this once.

Now dave's gonna' say something along the lines of "unless pointing the gun at someone is what makes them kill you when they'd otherwise left you alone".
If they come through my bedroom door they are toast.

I don't want it to be even close.

(I know what your saying about the baseball bats thingie but I treat intruders like they are, I don't know..ummmmm...DANGEROUS).

[GepperRankins]

My risk equals I stay alive. Your risk equals whatever the burglar decides to do with you.

As I said, in my house a burglar has plenty of chances to leave or not step foot in the house in the first place.

My gun ownership is otherwise irrelevent. :dry:
you provoke a shootout. theres no risk for me unless its just an armed crazy person who wants to kill me. theres less of them than armed burglars i reckon, so you're more likely to die.


Errm dave, they used pipes and baseball bats.

yeah i know. i'm just saying it doesn't mean all people who would use a gun to kill someone would use a pipe or baseball bat if they couldn't get a gun

[Busyman]

the one thing that graph doesn't show is who the killer/victim is. You do realize that most of the firearm problem is gang and/or drug related ?
But RP.....

If we outlawed guns, they wouldn't have them.....especially in America.

[Snee]

Agreed.

They also had no weapon to do shit with since it was nonexistent.

I would try my best to scamper to 1 of 6. I still may not make it.

Gotta try though. ;)
It's still a gamble since... well you know what I'm gonna' say, so let's just pretend we had this debate again.


It's an odds thing, you think the odds of the gun getting you killed are smaller than the risk of someone homicidal breaking in.

I think the odds are favour of the reversed.


It's really what this entire debate is about.

[RPerry]

you provoke a shootout. theres no risk for me unless its just an armed crazy person who wants to kill me. theres less of them than armed burglars i reckon, so you're more likely to die.



yeah i know. i'm just saying it doesn't mean all people who would use a gun to kill someone would use a pipe or baseball bat if they couldn't get a gun

Really, what were wars fought with before firearms ?

[GepperRankins]

But RP.....

If we outlawed guns, they wouldn't have them.....especially in America.
yeah very funny.


let the gangs kill each other. if the graph is wieghted by them and not you you're safe aren't you

[Busyman]

you provoke a shootout. theres no risk for me unless its just an armed crazy person who wants to kill me. theres less of them than armed burglars i reckon, so you're more likely to die.



yeah i know. i'm just saying it doesn't mean all people who would use a gun to kill someone would use a pipe or baseball bat if they couldn't get a gun
Riiiiight....and you know that the intruder is armed? :lol: :lol:

You also know whether he has a gun versus a baseball bat. :lol: :lol:

Furthermore, if he does have a baseball bat everything's cool because it ain't a gun. :lol: :lol:

btw I minimize chances of shoot outs by maximizing my target area and minimize being a target

[GepperRankins]

Really, what were wars fought with before firearms ?
oh so theres a war going on in america?

we aren't talking about wars here, we're talking about fights. theres a difference, if there were no guns and someone did you wrong you'd give them a good hiding.

with a gun its easier to just shoot them and kill them

[JPaul]

.... shot in the ass

I thought you wouldn't shot someone in the back.

[RPerry]

oh so theres a war going on in america?


Several of them actually, War on drugs, War on Terrorism..... we have all kinds of wars, depending on who's elected President :blink:

[Busyman]

oh so theres a war going on in america?

we aren't talking about wars here, we're talking about fights. theres a difference, if there were no guns and someone did you wrong you'd give them a good hiding.

with a gun its easier to just shoot them and kill them
I have to agree there.

Columbine might have been isolated to a home where the victims were beaten with baseball bats and wouldn't have been at school.

[Busyman]

I thought you wouldn't shot someone in the back.
Correct(ol). It's in the ass.

[JPaul]

Dude I have been in room full-o-folks that packed guns and couldn't have been in the least bit nervous.

They all had "instant death" in their coats. :dry:
Entry in "sad post of the year" contest.

[Snee]

What, I laughed my arse off at that one.

Sorry busy.

[GepperRankins]

Riiiiight....and you know that the intruder is armed? :lol: :lol:

You also know whether he has a gun versus a baseball bat. :lol: :lol:

Furthermore, if he does have a baseball bat everything's cool because it ain't a gun. :lol: :lol:

btw I minimize chances of shoot outs by maximizing my target area and minimize being a target
i'm not sure what you're talking about


if a burglar was going to attack me with a baseball bat in my house i reckon i could fight em. i know the ins and outs of my house so i could handle them.

if a burglar came at me with a gun i'd do what they say, i don't want to aggravate them.

i dont know what to make of that last line

[Busyman]

What, I laughed my arse off at that one.

Sorry busy.
The bad part is that it's true. :(

Sad indeed.

[Snee]

@dave: Didn't you and ben try beating the shit out of the bike-thieves?

On camera even.

[GepperRankins]

Several of them actually, War on drugs, War on Terrorism..... we have all kinds of wars, depending on who's elected President :blink:
those are "wars" between the government and the people. never people vs people, unless you count gang wars, but thats their own stupid fault you dont have to get involved.

[Busyman]

i'm not sure what you're talking about


if a burglar was going to attack me with a baseball bat in my house i reckon i could fight em. i know the ins and outs of my house so i could handle them.

if a burglar came at me with a gun i'd do what they say, i don't want to aggravate them.

i dont know what to make of that last line
I wouldn't "confront" intruders to find out what's what.

This is not the movies. I would literally defend myself and not look for a fight.

If I go down, what about my family? :(

[GepperRankins]

@dave: Didn't you and ben try beating the shit out of the bike-thieves?

On camera even.
they didn't have guns though.

if i had a gun i could have shot them, then they'd be a statistic.

[Busyman]

they didn't have guns though.

if i had a gun i could have shot them, then they'd be a statistic.
I can't shoot someone taking my bike. :(

[GepperRankins]

I wouldn't "confront" intruders to find out what's what.

This is not the movies. I would literally defend myself and not look for a fight.

If I go down, what about my family? :(
what if its your kid coming through that door? you were just defending yourself?

[GepperRankins]

I can't shoot someone taking my bike. :(
i thought you said you had a good aim, or do you keep your guns in the panniers?

[Busyman]

what if its your kid coming through that door? you were just defending yourself?
Why would I have my gun in the first place?

[RPerry]

i thought you said you had a good aim, or do you keep your guns in the panniers?


I think he means it isn't worth shooting someone over a bike......

stupid typo's :(

[Busyman]

i thought you said you had a good aim, or do you keep your guns in the panniers?
1. Can't discharge a firearm outside my home.

2. Not worth killing someone over. I'd tackle them....maybe.

3, I never said I had good aim.

[JPaul]

If I go down, what about my family? :(
Do you write scripts for "B" Movies, or what.

[GepperRankins]

I think he means it isn't worth shooting someone over a bike......

stupid typo's :(
they took one and came back for the other, you'd be tempted :naughty:

[GepperRankins]

Why would I have my gun in the first place?
because you thought there was a burglar.

[Snee]

A motorcycle, and they should have known better than coming back the second time, right?

So it might have been one of them dangerous bunches of idiots.

[RPerry]

they took one and came back for the other, you'd be tempted :naughty:

no, for something like that I would most likely break out with a baseball bat.
Remember what the gun laws are here, force with force, or threat to your home or auto. Stealing my bike would not fit under a justified shooting.... unless I could drag the bodies in without leaving evidence

[Snee]

no, for something like that I would most likely break out with a baseball bat.
Remember what the gun laws are here, force with force, or threat to your home or auto. Stealing my bike would not fit under a justified shooting.... unless I could drag the bodies in without leaving evidence
Motorcycle, not bicycle, and they did enter dave's property unlawfully.

Really, I think it would fall under one of those situations some people have mentioned earlier.

And he might not know if they were armed either.

[JPaul]

Remember what the gun laws are here, force with force, or threat to your home or auto.
So you can kill someone who is stealing your car.

That really is feckin' mental.

Property > Life.

No, that's just wrong.

[Busyman]

Do you write scripts for "B" Movies, or what.
what

[Busyman]

because you thought there was a burglar.
...and why would I think that?

[RPerry]

So you can kill someone who is stealing your car.

That really is feckin' mental.

Property > Life.

No, that's just wrong.

yes, if your in the car. believe it or not, your lucky if they take the car without shooting you anyway

[GepperRankins]

1. Can't discharge a firearm outside my home.

2. Not worth killing someone over. I'd tackle them....maybe.

3, I never said I had good aim.


1. right...

2. you don't think rationally in that situation. i'm surprised with all the action movies you've been in you've never been burgled.

3. i'm too tired to go back and check but you've said you have a better aim than people you know and you go to target practic 6 million times a week. i'd have thought that means you can hold a gun straight

[Busyman]

A motorcycle, and they should have known better than coming back the second time, right?

So it might have been one of them dangerous bunches of idiots.

1. Can't discharge a firearm outside my home.


:dry:

[GepperRankins]

...and why would I think that?
one of those "just in case" things. maybe you heard a glass break downstairs

[Busyman]

1. right...

2. you don't think rationally in that situation. i'm surprised with all the action movies you've been in you've never been burgled.

3. i'm too tired to go back and check but you've said you have a better aim than people you know and you go to target practic 6 million times a week. i'd have thought that means you can hold a gun straight
1. Glad you agree

2. I could have lit up the fella leaving my mother's yard but knew I couldn't. He had been harassing us for over 5 years. What did you about a bike again?

3. I go to the range. Yes. Uh huh.

[Busyman]

one of those "just in case" things. maybe you heard a glass break downstairs
I then call out to see if someone's hurt. DUH. :blink:

[hobbes]

the one thing that graph doesn't show is who the killer/victim is. You do realize that most of the firearm problem is gang and/or drug related ?

No, it is not. The most common cause of murder is an argument*

*Arguments include brawls due to the influence of narcotics or alcohol,
disagreements about money or property and other arguments.

Take away the guns and let the fists do the talking. So many drunken disputes that escalated into murder, just because those involved were carrying guns. 75% of the time a gun was involved.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/circumst.gif


If you look down there at the bottom, gang related killings are the last on the list.

The felony line refers to :Felony types include homicides committed during a rape, robbery, burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and violations of prostitution and commercial vice laws, other sex offenses, narcotic drug laws, and gambling laws.

Other contains a lot of "passion" related crime

The statistics are from the U.S. Department of Justice.

[JPaul]

yes, if your in the car. believe it or not, your lucky if they take the car without shooting you anyway
So you live in Jo'burg then.

[Snee]

:dry:
Does a garage count as inside or outside, just out of curiosity?


Inside a car is OK, right?

[JPaul]

No, it is not. The most common cause of murder is an argument*

*Arguments include brawls due to the influence of narcotics or alcohol,
disagreements about money or property and other arguments.

Take away the guns and let the fists do the talking. So many drunken disputes that escalated into murder, just because those involved were carrying guns. 75% of the time a gun was involved.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/circumst.gif


If you look down there at the bottom, gang related killings are the last on the list.

The felony line refers to :Felony types include homicides committed during a rape, robbery, burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, arson, and violations of prostitution and commercial vice laws, other sex offenses, narcotic drug laws, and gambling laws.

Other contains a lot of "passion" related crime

The statistics are from the U.S. Department of Justice.

So random arguments would end up with less dead people, if there were fewer guns involved.

I find that hard to believe.

[GepperRankins]

I then call out to see if someone's hurt. DUH. :blink:
then they know you're there

[Busyman]

then they know you're there
I would hope that my family would know I'm there. :huh:

[GepperRankins]

what if it was a burglar though?

[Busyman]

Does a garage count as inside or outside, just out of curiosity?


Inside a car is OK, right?
A garage connected to your house is inside obviously.

[Busyman]

what if it was a burglar though?
He would already know I'm there, ya know, with the cars outside, the walking around, tv on, lights on and all the chatter.

[Snee]

Oh ok, so if his bike was in the garage he could have shot them then.

Glad we got that sorted.

[Busyman]

Oh ok, so if his bike was in the garage he could have shot them then.

Glad we got that sorted.
Cool ;)

[GepperRankins]

He would already know I'm there, ya know, with the cars outside, the walking around, tv on, lights on and all the chatter.
no-one would break in with all that shit going on. it would be easier to spend another 10 minutes finding a house where they think everyones out or asleep

[Snee]

no-one would break in with all that shit going on. it would be easier to spend another 10 minutes finding a house where they think everyones out or asleep
Unless they are low life thugs.

[GepperRankins]

Unless they are low life thugs.
either really really stupid ones or busyman really really deserves it.

[JPaul]

either really really stupid ones or busyman really really deserves it.
Or he keeps posting this nonsense and confirms what we all think.

That someone who really thinks the way he posts wouldn't actually be on this forum.

[Busyman]

no-one would break in with all that shit going on. it would be easier to spend another 10 minutes finding a house where they think everyones out or asleep
Damn I guess they missed me. Whew!!!

[vidcc]

Well this thread has gone on for some distance now and i haven't seen any original arguements for or against as it's been debated many times before.

I would like however to suggest one part of guns and shooting that we can all agree on.

machine guns when fired by large breasted women wearing skimpy bikinis make the bossoms wobble and bounce and if video footage is taken that can be slowed down for "research" purposes :naughty: .......... now i ask you all..... Is that a bad thing??????

[JPaul]

Damn I guess they missed me. Whew!!!
Good as gold, well done that man.

[Busyman]

Well this thread has gone on for some distance now and i haven't seen any original arguements for or against as it's been debated many times before.

I would like however to suggest one part of guns and shooting that we can all agree on.

machine guns when fired by large breasted women wearing skimpy bikinis make the bossoms wobble and bounce and if video footage is taken that can be slowed down for "research" purposes :naughty: .......... now i ask you all..... Is that a bad thing??????
As long as they shoot me with breast milk instead of bullets........ :w00t: but :sick:

[vidcc]

Perhaps my eyesight is going but it's impossible to find moving gifs on the subject :(


http://www.gunculture.net/images/uploads/vendela.jpg

http://www.gunculture.net/images/uploads/swedishgungirls.jpg

[fkdup74]

Perhaps my eyesight is going but it's impossible to find moving gifs on the subject :(


http://www.gunculture.net/images/uploads/vendela.jpg

http://www.gunculture.net/images/uploads/swedishgungirls.jpg

I think your eye sight is gone,
I find those pics very moving :naughty:

[RPerry]

So you live in Jo'burg then.

no, I live outside of Orlando, where it seems people prefer Carjacking compared to just stealing a car out of a lot, and Home invasion ( armed occupied ) compared to going into an empty house. what difference does it make anyway? I know what happens in my area just as well as you know what happens in yours.

[GepperRankins]

no, I live outside of Orlando, where it seems people prefer Carjacking compared to just stealing a car out of a lot, and Home invasion ( armed occupied ) compared to going into an empty house. what difference does it make anyway? I know what happens in my area just as well as you know what happens in yours.
you know the solution. have a car sticker saying this car doesn't have a an imobiliser


and no i reckon theres something unsexy about a girl with a gun.

and j2k4. what?

[fkdup74]

and no i reckon theres something unsexy about a girl with a gun.

so you're afraid of women as well as guns.... :P pwned :01: :P
besides, she wasn't just packin a gun,
she had a pair of .38s :w00t: :lol:

[JPaul]

no, I live outside of Orlando, where it seems people prefer Carjacking compared to just stealing a car out of a lot, and Home invasion ( armed occupied ) compared to going into an empty house. what difference does it make anyway? I know what happens in my area just as well as you know what happens in yours.
And they shoot the occupant, rather than just stealing the car or the property from the house. That, mon amigo means that the violence is in addition to the property crime, not a possibility in it's commission. It means that they want to hurt and kill, as well as steal.

Which only serves to illustrate that your culture is getting ever more violent.

You really, really have to do something about those guns. Any muppet can get one and then can pretty much do whatever they want.

Look at it as simple maths. If there are 810 "bad" guns, then you can negate them by allowing 10 "good" guns. Or by taking away the 10. The former leaves you with 20 guns, the latter no guns. I prefer the latter.

I would however suggest the the gun manufacturers and retailers prefer the sales 20 to the 0. It's feck all to do with anything but economics.

As an aside, do the thiefs regularly steal the owner's guns as well. Which I a certain the owner will replace in jig time. Possibly buy more, just to be on the safe side.

[manker]

Okay.

The new wave of certified professional burglar (that is to say, one who holds a PhD in the field from a reputable institution) has supplanted the old, run-of-the-mill, non-chess-playing sort of house-breaking thief, and we must respect his investment of time and effort by cowering in a corner while he helps himself to the fruits of our labor.

Sounds about right-you've convinced me. :frusty:You seem rather uneasy in this thread.


The point is that a burglar doesn't need to be more intelligent than you to shoot you, he just has to point and fire.

I guess you can see that but choose to skirt around it. Not the posting style I expect from you but a theme you've continually displayed in this thread.

[manker]

Btw, wtf is this thread doing in the off-topic poll section. Sure there is a bit of spam but it gets that way in the Drawing Room too sometimes.


Also, what is an off-topic poll in the off-topic section. It seems to me that off-topic on a file sharing board is something not to do with filesharing therefore an off-topic poll in the off-topic section should have to be about filesharing else it has no place here :dry:

[MCHeshPants420]

Also, what is an off-topic poll in the off-topic section. It seems to me that off-topic on a file sharing board is something not to do with filesharing therefore an off-topic poll in the off-topic section should have to be about filesharing else it has no place here :dry:

Ouch, you done hurt my thinking muscle.:(

[Snee]

J2: I'd reply, but it appears that manker already did it for me.

[GepperRankins]

stupid people use guns to defend themselves, clever ones use ironing boards :ermm:

[GepperRankins]

I have evinced a fitting and proper cynicism for the circumstances which require such a choice.


so you don't want to defend your "realm" with a gun but you need to?

[Snee]

Keep your talk of skirts to yourself, girly-man. :P

I don't know where you get your idea.

If I choose to defend my "realm" with deadly force, I am, by law, allowed.

That I opt to do so obviously bothers you, at least to the extent you cannot manage your urge to berate and belittle my choice.

I have not at any time in this thread rejoiced that I am constitutionally enabled to defend myself with a gun; rather, I have evinced a fitting and proper cynicism for the circumstances which require such a choice.

I have not recommended this strategy for anyone else.

I find your expressions of moral relativism and claims of enlightenment intolerant and oppressive.

You accord the burglar more credit and freedom, indeed, legitimacy-than me.

Well done. ;)
The bulk of his post was about the burglar's intelligence, or lack thereof, though :huh:

And the fact that you haven't really answered as to why that would make a difference.

[manker]

Keep your talk of skirts to yourself, girly-man. :P

I don't know where you get your idea.

If I choose to defend my "realm" with deadly force, I am, by law, allowed.

That I opt to do so obviously bothers you, at least to the extent you cannot manage your urge to berate and belittle my choice.

I have not at any time in this thread rejoiced that I am constitutionally enabled to defend myself with a gun; rather, I have evinced a fitting and proper cynicism for the circumstances which require such a choice.

I have not recommended this strategy for anyone else.

I find your expressions of moral relativism and claims of enlightenment intolerant and oppressive.

You accord the burglar more credit and freedom, indeed, legitimacy-than me.

Well done. ;)
Yet you still dance a merry jig around the issue without actually adressing it.

Why on earth would intellect matter when a burglar has a gun trained upon you. Which he would do since you choose to advertise your gun therefore any burglar with the audacity to break in while you're there would no doubt be ready for a shooting match, whereas in all likelyhood all you'd be ready for is supper.

In fact, while the signs may be a deterrent to some, what you're doing in effect is ensuring that any intruder will come prepared and probably not alone. It could also serve to entice an intruder ... 'what is he protecting'.

I may be berating your choice but I do not seek to belittle it. You can do as you please, I am seeking only to point out the folly I believe to be inherent with that choice. I also don't feel morally superior nor more enlightened.

I merely feel lucky that I am not scared of the society I live in such that I feel the need to arm myself with a weapon.

[Snee]

How? :blink:

[Snee]

Yes, but how will his lower intelligence give you an advantage?

How will it affect what proceeds from there on? As you put it.

[GepperRankins]

If I have to explain that to you, SnnY, you might feel insulted, as I do at the moment.
seriously. we need it explaining. firing a gun requires no intelligence, so you don't have an advantage there. as far as i know intelligence has no sway on reaction times either, so theres no advantage there.

unless maybe your house is the crystal maze, then they'd need some intelligence. you might have an advantage there, but i doubt it

[GepperRankins]

My bad.

I had forgotten it was as simple as pulling the trigger.

BTW-

Is our prospective burglar walking about with his gun drawn and aimed (sideways)? :huh:
breaking into someone else's property, i would presume they have it ready.

[Snee]

If I have to explain that to you, SnnY, you might feel insulted, as I do at the moment.
How so? I'd just like to know how your bigger brain is going to give you the upper hand when you happen to be standing face to face with an armed burglar, is that so hard to answer.

I don't mean to put you down, but as has been said, unless there's a major malfunction in someone's head, firing a gun, at relatively close range, isn't that hard.



I think being smart comes into play when you show the foresight to get an alarm, and things like that.

This because an idiot wouldn't think of buying an alarm, but in an immediate, face-to-face situation I'm a tad perplexed as to how you have an obvious advantage.

[manker]

breaking into someone else's property, i would presume they have it ready.It's a fairly safe bet.

With, and this is a conservative estimate, twenty five signs saying 'ENTER ILLEGALLY AT YOUR PERIL; THE OCCUPANTS OF THIS DOMICILE ARE TRAINED KILLERS, AND WELL-ARMED' dotted around on every window and door - I would say that any intruder is definitely going to be, ahem, alert. Not to mention the fact that he'll probably be with one or more of his equally circumspect mates.



As an aside, I don't know why you would feel insulted, j2, I am merely disagreeing with what you do. I presuppose that you think I'm quite mad for suggesting that you'd be better off without the gun yet I find the notion far from insulting - it's actually quite reasuring :D

[JPaul]

It would appear that, if you have signage advertising that you have a guard dog, which then attacks a burglar (the dog, not the sign), then you may get sued.

If however your family pet attacks an intruder then they have less comeback.

Is there any truth in this or did I make it up myself, perhaps in a dream-like state.

[manker]

It would appear that, if you have signage advertising that you have a guard dog, which then attacks a burglar (the dog, not the sign), then you may get sued.

If however your family pet attacks an intruder then they have less comeback.

Is there any truth in this or did I make it up myself, perhaps in a dream-like state.I Cayce what you're on about, Edgar. However, a good lawyer could argue a case either way. If you buy a sabre toothed Japanese fighting wolf then the likelyhood of it injuring an intruder is easily foreseeable. Signs or no signs.

Not that I'm advocating suing dog-owners whose pet may thwart an illegal intruder - just that lawyers can be sneaky like that.

[JPaul]

Did you just call me a mentalist, at all.

[manker]

Not really :unsure:

I may have likened you to a bloke that lots of mentalists worship but that is by the by.

[JPaul]

Not really :unsure:

I may have likened you to a bloke that lots of mentalists worship but that is by the by.
You likened me to Rikk :blink:

[Mïcrösöül°V³]

guns are just another way to reach out and touch someone.

[Busyman]

I merely feel lucky that I am not scared of the society I live in such that I feel the need to arm myself with a weapon.
A moot point seeing that it is illegal for you to own one. :P

To be nitpicky, I am not armed until they break in.

[manker]

A moot point seeing that it is illegal for you to own one. :PNo it isn't.

Wherever did you get that notion. I could have a firearm in the house to protect myself quite legally if I wanted to, but I do not :P

[Busyman]

It would appear that, if you have signage advertising that you have a guard dog, which then attacks a burglar (the dog, not the sign), then you may get sued.

If however your family pet attacks an intruder then they have less comeback.

Is there any truth in this or did I make it up myself, perhaps in a dream-like state.
You made it up.

Actually in either case you can be sued.

Our country has litigation for everything. :angry:

I think there was a case where a homeowner had a tiger that fucked the intruder up and the homeowner was liable. :dry:

My opinion is that if you break the law (especially on a b&e) then your rights are forfeit.

[bujub22]

guns are just another way to reach out and touch someone.but why does everyone run when i wana play!?:gunsmilie

[Busyman]

No it isn't.

Wherever did you get that notion. I could have a firearm in the house to protect myself quite legally if I wanted to, but I do not :P
Apologies.

I thought it was illegal in your country.

[manker]

Apologies.

I thought it was illegal in your country.Nps, easy mistake to make. It's only handguns that are illegal in the UK.

[bujub22]

You made it up.

Actually in either case you can be sued.

Our country has litigation for everything. :angry:

I think there was a case where a homeowner had a tiger that fucked the intruder up and the homeowner was liable. :dry:

My opinion is that if you break the law (especially on a b&e) then your rights are forfeit.
:angry: u got that right!

case in point

man broke into my father house which he owns 3 german shepards they dogs when he broke in mald him and ripped out his arm from the socked and chewed off and ate 6 of his fingers !

later on my father was sued and the guy won and my father had to pay a settlement but i remember it being small cuz he broke in and the courts not feelin sorry for him?

[Busyman]

Nps, easy mistake to make. It's only handguns that are illegal in the UK.
Oh then your law mirrors Washington DC.

Of course there are still tons of handgun shootings......

That ban has never worked.

edit: I hate to defend my home with a shotgun or rifle anyway.
A shotgun can hit anything (including surrounding walls and people) and a rifle is shit for close quarter combat.

[manker]

Oh then your law mirrors Washington DC.

Of course there are still tons of handgun shootings......

That ban has never worked.

edit: I hate to defend my home with a shotgun or rifle anyway.
A shotgun can hit anything (including surrounding walls and people) and a rifle is shit for close quarter combat.I wouldn't have a clue about the close quarter combat thing.

But I doubt our laws mirror the DC laws, for instance I would have to go thro' a huge rigmarole if I was to actually be allowed to keep a rifle in my house. Let alone six.

[Busyman]

I wouldn't have a clue about the close quarter combat thing.

But I doubt our laws mirror the DC laws, for instance I would have to go thro' a huge rigmarole if I was to actually be allowed to keep a rifle in my house. Let alone six.
Yeah but I have handguns.

I'm not actually in DC (anymore). I'm in Maryland and work in DC.

We call our area, which includes Northern Virginia, parts of Prince George's and Montgomery County Maryland and of course DC, the Washington Metropolitan Area.

Right now I live on the fringes of that area, which I prefer.

I used to live in the hood awhiles back.

[hobbes]

Yeah but I have handguns.

I'm not actually in DC (anymore). I'm in Maryland and work in DC.

We call our area, which includes Northern Virginia, parts of Prince George's and Montgomery County Maryland and of course DC, the Washington Metropolitan Area.

Right now I live on the fringes of that area, which I prefer.

I used to live in the hood awhiles back.

Well that explains why the gun ban does not work. Most either don't live in DC or can travel outside DC to get a gun.

Who will know you have a gun until after you use it.

It is like drawing a box on a map of the ocean and saying that no fish are allowed here. No nets, no barriers, just words stating that they are not allowed.

The DC ban is just words on paper.

[vidcc]

@ busy

comprehensive uk gun law guide (http://www.parker-hale.com/law.htm)

sorry if it's too much reading.... this old article from 2000 may helpgive a quick idea
read here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/955984.stm)


some interesting bits:


The new rules, when introduced, will require shotgun owners to demonstrate "good reason" for needing such a weapon.

The power to revoke a shotgun licence would also be given to police.



New gun regulations:

Tightening controls on the maximum number of shotguns which could be held on a certificate

Requiring two detailed character references with applications for shotgun certificates

Possibly allowing the sale of air guns only through registered firearms dealers
Introducing a common standard for testing of airguns

Possibly banning the sale of imitation firearms to under-18s

[Busyman]

@ busy

comprehensive uk gun law guide (http://www.parker-hale.com/law.htm)

sorry if it's too much reading.... this old article from 2000 may helpgive a quick idea
read here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/955984.stm)


some interesting bits:
See this is my thing...my the fuck don't we tighten our gun laws.

Our laws are willy nilly and allow anyone to get anything just about.
I'm for tightening the laws without removing guns. Total removal will never happen here anyway...it's a pipe dream.

[Busyman]

Well that explains why the gun ban does not work. Most either don't live in DC or can travel outside DC to get a gun.

Who will know you have a gun until after you use it.

It is like drawing a box on a map of the ocean and saying that no fish are allowed here. No nets, no barriers, just words stating that they are not allowed.

The DC ban is just words on paper.
No it ain't.

The average joe can't legally own a firearm. I don't think I'd own a burner if I lived in DC.

There was a period where I had neither a burner or a registered firearm.

Bringing weapons into DC is a no-brainer. The ban is still there.
The UK, however, is an island.

The US can't even stop people from getting over here. :lol: :lol:

[MCHeshPants420]

Bringing weapons into DC is a no-brainer. The ban is still there.
The UK, however, is an island.


I totally understand your point about how easy it would be to get guns into America but I think you over-estimate the UK being an island thing. We don't want for drugs like cocaine here (thank jebus) and if there was a real demand for firearms I reckon smugglers would have no problem getting them in here.

My point being I don't think us being an island protects us as much as we or other people would like to think. I mean, it's not keeping the asylum seekers out... ;)

[fkdup74]

and if there was a real demand for firearms I reckon smugglers would have no problem getting them in here.
yes, I posted that probably 20 pages ago about our situation here in America

so....now explain to me how removing/banning firearms helps the honest citizen? :dry:
teh crooks can still get em, easily at that, but not the home owner whos worked his ass off,
60 hrs a week, 52 weeks a year, for 20 or so years, just to have something his own,
only to let some dickhead come and take it at gunpoint because the liberals want guns banned
so, AGAIN, the honest guy gets fkd while the shitbags get off
not what I would call justice

[Busyman]

I totally understand your point about how easy it would be to get guns into America but I think you over-estimate the UK being an island thing. We don't want for drugs like cocaine here (thank jebus) and if there was a real demand for firearms I reckon smugglers would have no problem getting them in here.

My point being I don't think us being an island protects us as much as we or other people would like to think. I mean, it's not keeping the asylum seekers out... ;)
I forgot about our rampant drug problem in the equation of things.

Good point.

My point is teh banning ain't workin' in teh nation's capital.

Teh average joe doesn't buy burners.

[GepperRankins]

yes, I posted that probably 20 pages ago about our situation here in America

so....now explain to me how removing/banning firearms helps the honest citizen? :dry:
teh crooks can still get em, easily at that, but not the home owner whos worked his ass off,
60 hrs a week, 52 weeks a year, for 20 or so years, just to have something his own,
only to let some dickhead come and take it at gunpoint because the liberals want guns banned
so, AGAIN, the honest guy gets fkd while the shitbags get off
not what I would call justice
how many times do we have to say it?

if the honest citizen doesn't have a gun, the criminal won't have the incentive to need one themselves.

[manker]

this isn't a spam section jagoff :dry:Actually, it is. Tho' I've no earthly idea why this thread got moved here :dry:

[sArA]

Actually, it is. Tho' I've no earthly idea why this thread got moved here :dry:

I didn't move it myself, but its far too emotive a topic to be spammed in the lounge so that it has no interest to anyone other than posters of single smilie lol's....


fecking trouble manker :angry:

[JPaul]

I think he was referring to which Poll section it was in mate.

He was rattling on about that earlier on, for some reason.

[manker]

I didn't move it myself, but its far too emotive a topic to be spammed in the lounge so that it has no interest to anyone other than posters of single smilie lol's....I mean why did it get moved from on-topic polls to off-topic polls.

Did the subject of gun ownership suddenly become frivolous.





fecking trouble manker :angry: Moi? :angel_not

[Busyman]

how many times do we have to say it?

if the honest citizen doesn't have a gun, the criminal won't have the incentive to need one themselves.
How many times do I have to say it?

We don't live in DisneyWorld and thieves sometimes kill anyway. :ermm:

[GepperRankins]

How many times do I have to say it?

We don't live in DisneyWorld and thieves sometimes kill anyway. :ermm:
how many times do i have to say it?

everyone else is right and you're just a paranoid loony

[JPaul]

I mean why did it get moved from on-topic polls to off-topic polls.

Did the subject of gun ownership suddenly become frivolous.


Moi? :angel_not
Forgive me for being a butinsky and telling you what you were saying.

However I think you objected to it being moved from "Serious" polls to off-topic. Implying that the subject was, well not serious.

I say this because I don't think there actually is an "on-topic" polls section.

[manker]

Forgive me for being a butinsky and telling you what you were saying.

However I think you objected to it being moved from "Serious" polls to off-topic. Implying that the subject was, well not serious.

I say this because I don't think there actually is an "on-topic" polls section.Butinsky :lol:

Yes, I objected for just that reason but then I also decided to object about that other thing:
Also, what is an off-topic poll in the off-topic section. It seems to me that off-topic on a file sharing board is something not to do with filesharing therefore an off-topic poll in the off-topic section should have to be about filesharing else it has no place here and should be moved forthwith to the on-topic polls section in the off topic board section :dry: Basically, I wrote that to be an awkward smartarse.

[GepperRankins]

TheDave said that the day this world was made :snooty:

[JPaul]

TheDave said that the day this world was made :snooty:
But he's a git who everybody ignores.

You know that better than anybody.

[Busyman]

how many times do i have to say it?

everyone else is right and you're just a paranoid loony
Mmmmmk. Since when did I agree with everyone else, especially (for the most part) folks that don't even live here.

We had a rash of young drivers crashing into shit so they changed the stipulations for youngsters getting a driver's license.

They need something similar by putting stipulations on gaining gun ownership since it is recognized by many as a problem.

[GepperRankins]

just stop young people owning guns? yeah that'd work :rolleyes:

kids would just get other people to buy their guns.





and no this isn't what you've been saying all along.
letting anybody have a gun means paranoid loonies like you will think you have to get a gun to defend yourselves, therefore robbers would rob anyway have to get a gun to defend themselves from you.

it's a vicious cycle but until someone gives up their guns, no one will

[Busyman]

just stop young people owning guns? yeah that'd work :rolleyes:

kids would just get other people to buy their guns.





and no this isn't what you've been saying all along.
letting anybody have a gun means paranoid loonies like you will think you have to get a gun to defend yourselves, therefore robbers would rob anyway have to get a gun to defend themselves from you.

it's a vicious cycle but until someone gives up their guns, no one will
I'm not out here waving my gun at people you dick.

I simply own guns. Ownership doesn't make one part of any cycle.

It sounds like you are the one that's paranoid.
I'm as comfortable as can be.

[GepperRankins]

i never said you waved it about in public, but simply having it in your house is enough to convince the burglar to get one.

and theres enough people who think like you that a burglar can just presume the home they're attacking has a gun.

[Busyman]

i never said you waved it about in public, but simply having it in your house is enough to convince the burglar to get one.

and theres enough people who think like you that a burglar can just presume the home they're attacking has a gun.
First off I don't announce I have one, so how the fuck would he be convinced?

You talk of a vicious cycle yet unarmed folks getting shot is what I see.

I don't see these movie shoot-outs that you talk of unless it's drug related or police related. I also don't see these "Oh there was a burglar and he accidently shot his daughter" stories either.

You don't know shit from shinolah except how it is in your country and the "stats" from over here.

[GepperRankins]

as long as its common known that so many people have guns, one can presume somebody has a gun.

when was the last time you saw an unarmed person getting shot?

what? i'm not talking about movie style shootouts, i'm talking about a confrontation between armed homeowner and armed burglar in which one or both get shot.

"stats" are fact, so i can talk about them as much as i want.

[JPaul]

I simply own guns. Ownership doesn't make one part of any cycle.

Yes it does.

[Busyman]

as long as its common known that so many people have guns, one can presume somebody has a gun.

when was the last time you saw an unarmed person getting shot?

what? i'm not talking about movie style shootouts, i'm talking about a confrontation between armed homeowner and armed burglar in which one or both get shot.

"stats" are fact, so i can talk about them as much as i want.
Stats don't equal conclusion though.

Hmmm...the last one....

An old lady in Hyattsville, MD was killed and her jewelry was taken. I know it was this year.

Further from than that, almost all the folks I hear about on the news are unarmed. :blink:

I can't remember an armed homeowner being killed.
I do remember a gentlemen in MD shooting and killing a fella trying to steal his car outside his home and injuring another.

He only got in trouble because his dumb ass had some other charge. It didn't even seem like the police were going to charge him for discharging his weapon outside his home. :huh: (pretty fucked up, I already caught one stray bullet) :dry:

edit: Keep in mind, if I'm shot and killed in my home and I never got to my gun, I was unarmed. :ermm:

[Busyman]

Yes it does.
I'm sorry. You're right.

It's the cycle of gun ownership. :huh:

[Adster]

no i don't besdies guns are ilegal in Australia for this reason here http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.html?sect=8

you know whats funny/?

In america you arn't allowed to drink till age 21 its 18 here to try to avoid young 18 to 21 year olds from causeing drunken deaths

yet you can buy a gun at age 18 and kill anyone very ironic



yet you can buy a gun at

[Busyman]

no i don't besdies guns are ilegal in Australia for this reason here http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.html?sect=8

you know whats funny/?

In america you arn't allowed to drink till age 21 its 18 here to try to avoid young 18 to 21 year olds from causeing drunken deaths

yet you can buy a gun at age 18 and kill anyone very ironic



yet you can buy a gun at
That is ironic. The law needs changin'.

(I don't think 18 year-olds can buy handguns though yet they can join the armed forces) :unsure:

[enoughfakefiles]

You don't know shit from shinolah except how it is in your country and the "stats" from over here.

I don`t understand this line.????

In the UK we`re allowed to have tv and the internet plus world news and documentaries that once in a while actually tell whats going on around the world and not just in our own country. :ph34r:

[Busyman]

I don`t understand this line.????

In the UK we`re allowed to have tv and the internet plus world news and documentaries that once in a while actually tell whats going on around the world and not just in our own country. :ph34r:
You still don't live here.

I would say the same to a person that lives in America but in area of low population or low crime rate.

Life experience > Google

:dry:

[GepperRankins]

I don`t understand this line.????

In the UK we`re allowed to have tv and the internet plus world news and documentaries that once in a while actually tell whats going on around the world and not just in our own country. :ph34r:
theres a world?

i feel compelled again to say stats = fact. to try and dispute that you must be retarded or hormonal

[Busyman]

theres a world?

i feel compelled again to say stats = fact. to try and dispute that you must be retarded or hormonal
Too bad

stats < conclusion, solution

[GepperRankins]

You still don't live here.

I would say the same to a person that lives in America but in area of low population or low crime rate.

Life experience > Google

:dry:
theres 36.137 people per square kilometer in the USA (not including alaska)
theres 246.899 people per square kilometer in the UK

just for the record, like

[GepperRankins]

Too bad

stats < conclusion, solution
how can you have a solution if you refuse to recognise the problem?

[GepperRankins]

my solution would be to take guns away from everybody and let the police do their job.

like you're bound to say, criminals wouldn't all just give their guns up. with strict set sentances for being caught in possession of a firearm and no reason to need one to burglarise people, they'd see sense in getting rid.

[Busyman]

my solution would be to take guns away from everybody and let the police do their job.

like you're bound to say, criminals wouldn't all just give their guns up. with strict set sentances for being caught in possession of a firearm and no reason to need one to burglarise people, they'd see sense in getting rid.
Disneyland. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Many criminals have burners which already have strict guidelines regarding possesion.

You hang on to this notion that intruders carry firearms to protect themselves from victims with firearms.

I suppose intruders armed only with knives (they are out there) only carry them for "protection" too and NOT for the power it may convey against potential victims. :dry:

Police doing their job is great. However, they don't stand watch over my house. :dry:

Maybe it's just that UK criminals (as a whole) are softer than those over here.

[RPerry]

with strict set sentances for being caught in possession of a firearm and no reason to need one to burglarise people, they'd see sense in getting rid.


You would think so, wouldn't you ? Florida impliments a 10-20-life law already.

10 years for having a gun
20 years if you fire
life if you shoot someone

( notice this is for criminals in the offense of a crime. not for homeowners/citizens protecting themselves )

[GepperRankins]

yes i mean all guns. with exception of shotguns and rifles for farmers and hunters

[Biggles]

Maybe it's just that UK criminals (as a whole) are softer than those over here.

The penalty for breaking and entering (usually to swipe the tv and dvd player and then leg it as fast as possible) is relatively light. Possession of a firearm alone is (as I recall) five years. Use of one in a robbery without it even being loaded is even more.

As the chances of any the householders being armed is next to zero, the value of a firearm is extremely limited to a UK burglar, who would prefer not to meet the householder at all if possible. Burglary in the US sounds like a different game (and one I hope that does not catch on over here)

However, I appreciate the predicament. If one starts from a basis of everyone having a gun it is not going to be easy (feasible?) to persuade all sides to stand down. The UK, Europe and Japan generally are starting from a completely different position. We have our problems, but large numbers of gun deaths is not one of them and hopefully it will stay that way.

[shanu]

[QUOTE=Adster]no i don't besdies guns are ilegal in Australia for this reason here http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.html?sect=8

hi all,
very interesting conversation this one, just to clarify an earlier point of view

guns are legal in australia, handguns included.
there are however very strict licensing, storage and usage conditions.

[Adster]

[QUOTE=Adster]no i don't besdies guns are ilegal in Australia for this reason here http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.html?sect=8

hi all,
very interesting conversation this one, just to clarify an earlier point of view

guns are legal in australia, handguns included.
there are however very strict licensing, storage and usage conditions.

your right


. The matter of gun laws was not included in the Australian Constitution when it became operative at the start of the 20th Century, hence gun laws remain within the jurisdiction of the six states (New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania) and the two territories (Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory). The Commonwealth (Australian) government does not have the power to make gun laws but it can control imports. Since 1991 ex-military rifles such as Kalashnikov types, and military style lookalikes such as the Ruger Mini 14 cannot be imported.

2. Major gun massacres occurred in Victoria and NSW in 1987, in NSW 1991 and in Tasmania in 1996. 150 people died in multiple death shootings alone in the decade starting January 1987. Stricter gun laws have only been made in Australia after a major gun massacre. Some states did improve their gun laws in the late 1980's up to the mid-1990's, and to a degree such improvements filtered slowly to all jurisdictions. The gun death rate was noticeably reduced by 1995.

3. The death of 35 people and serious injuries to almost 20 others at Port Arthur on 28 April 1996 prompted the Australian government to urge a meeting of the eight state and territory police ministers to introduce a new and stricter range of gun controls. Three major changes were introduced.

(a) Gun registration was introduced to all eight jurisdictions
(b) Attempts were made to have uniform gun laws throughout Australia
(c) A new standardised gun licensing scheme was put into practice.

This new scheme allowed non-self-loading guns to be readily available but placed restrictions on high capacity self-loading rimfire rifles,
self-loading centrefire rifles and shotguns and pump-action shotguns. These were the types of guns mainly used in Australian gun massacres. The basis for these changes had been laid in 1990 when the National Committee on Violence (NCV) made about 20 recommendations for improved gun controls. The NCV itself was formed as a result of the six gun massacres in 1987.

There were about four million guns in Australia. One million were no longer in the legal category so a gun buy-back scheme was introduced to purchase these. The estimated average price was $500 per gun. Hence 500 million dollars was set aside. Only 640,000 guns were offered for purchase, hence $320 million was used for this purpose. About another 40 million dollars was used for administration and assistance to gun traders. Since the 500 million dollars had come from a medical levy the balance was distributed to medical research and welfare. It should be noted that the total amount spent on purchasing guns was only about 200 million dollars US. It should also be noted that up to 40% of Australian gun owners did not obey the law, making the term 'law abiding shooters' look somewhat ridiculous.

4. Several exemptions to the gun licensing schedule were made by most jurisdictions. Members of certain shotgun target shooting clubs were permitted to use self-loading shotguns and many rural property owners and professional shooters were permitted to use self- loading rifles and shotguns.

5. In Australia, handguns have only been available to bona-fide members of approved pistol clubs and to gun collectors. None of the changes to gun laws made in recent decades have affected the availability of handguns. Non-self-loading long-guns are readily available to Australians who are at least 18 years of age, have no police record and who pass a simple shooters licence test. As Australian gun laws have become stricter in the 1990's gun deaths have lowered; never-the-less, several serious weaknesses remain within the Australian gun law system. Too many Australians still die from gun wounds.

Interested readers should have a look at our [books] on Australian gun laws.

[Busyman]

[QUOTE=Adster]no i don't besdies guns are ilegal in Australia for this reason here http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/bryant/index_1.html?sect=8

hi all,
very interesting conversation this one, just to clarify an earlier point of view

guns are legal in australia, handguns included.
there are however very strict licensing, storage and usage conditions.
We need something similar. ;)

[JPaul]

Wouldn't that require an amendment to your constitution. Or is it an urban myth that you have a constitutional right to bear arms.

[RPerry]

Wouldn't that require an amendment to your constitution. Or is it an urban myth that you have a constitutional right to bear arms.

Bill of Rights

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentii

[GepperRankins]

Bill of Rights

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentii
well regulated militia? :blink:

[Busyman]

For the record, I agree; I have no problem whatsoever with strict and uniform gun laws regarding purchase, procurement and lawful/unlawful use.
Wouldn't that require an amendment to your constitution.
No.

[JPaul]

No.
Thanks, I had thought it was a constitutional right.

[Busyman]

Thanks, I had thought it was a constitutional right.
You thought correct.

[JPaul]

You thought correct.
That's a relief.

[manker]

It just occurred to me that while several of you, and SnnY in particular, are so enamored of the intelligence of the criminal element you view them as omnipotent in "battle", you won't grant their intelligence is sufficient to opt out of robbing me in the face of my admonition over the efficacy of such an attempt. :huh:

Curious, eh? ;)If you read the replies then you'll see that far from generalising all criminals to be masterminds, people that have put counter points to your assertions have actually been careful to qualify their statements. The point being that if a criminal, indeed one that could easily outwit you, decided to break into your home despite your 'admonation' (that word is used in jest, I take it) then you're probably fucked all ends up because of your precautions.

I have outlined why at legnth.

Btw, you intimated at being insulted earlier in the week yet the condescension is dripping from your subsequent posts, is it tit-for-tat or do you really think I'm thick.

[DanB]

well regulated militia? :blink:

Vigilantes rawk :01:

[Peerzy]

Busyman, would you give up your 6 guns, if you knew for a fact that you would never be attacked in your home?

[Snee]

It just occurred to me that while several of you, and SnnY in particular, are so enamored of the intelligence of the criminal element you view them as omnipotent in "battle", you won't grant their intelligence is sufficient to opt out of robbing me in the face of my admonition over the efficacy of such an attempt. :huh:

Curious, eh? ;)
If that's how you read what we wrote, then maybe you need to read it a couple of times more, since I don't think you get it.

No one suggested that they were omnipotent, or even that they were particularily intelligent.

(Except manker, who put forth a different scenario, which also has its merits.)

What we did say, was that intelligence isn't really that big a factor if it comes to a point were you and they are face to face, guns aimed at each other, in your living room.

I daresay their brains have fuck all to do with whether they will hit you or not in such a situation. Why you persist in saying something along the lines of "I'm more intelligent, so therefore my chances of besting them are better" over and over when such a situation is proposed to you, I will never know.

Yes, by buying an alarm you do show that you have the brains to think of at least that. And by doing so you improve your chances of averting burglary

But if they do break in, and it does come to an armed confrontation, I, or rather we, doubt that you will automatically win just because your IQ is higher.


Would you like me to explain it again? 'cos I've only asked twice. Maybe third is the charm.

I can do this condescension-thing too.



And busyman, our criminals aren't pussies enough to need to hide behind guns, I think you got this bit about them being softer a bit backwards.

[Busyman]

If that's how you read what we wrote, then maybe you need to read it a couple of times more, since I don't think you get it.

No one suggested that they were omnipotent, or even that they were particularily intelligent.

What we did say, was that intelligence isn't really that big a factor if it comes to a point were you and they are face to face, guns aimed at each other, in your living room.

I daresay their brains have fuck all to do with whether they will hit you or not in such a situation. Why you persist in saying something along the lines of "I'm more intelligent, so therefore my chances of besting them are better" over and over when such a situation is proposed to you, I will never know.

Yes, by buying an alarm you do show that you have the brains to think of at least that. And by doing so you improve your chances of averting burglary

But if they do break in, and it does come to an armed confrontation, I, or rather we, doubt that you will automatically win just because your IQ is higher.


Would you like me to explain it again? 'cos I've only asked twice. Maybe third is the charm.

I can do this condescension-thing too.



And busyman, our criminals aren't pussies enough to need to hide behind guns, I think you got this bit about them being softer a bit backwards.
You see that's where that street shit comes in.

It's not about being a pussy. It's about making you do what the fuck they want and sometimes flexing.

You can't grasp that this happens whether you armed or not. This where I say that maybe the criminal is a little softer. If you equate it the same then I wish we had pussy ass criminals.

j2 and I are going to think we will best an intruder. Anything's possible regarding us being bested. I'm not going roll over like the stereotypical Frenchman and just say, "Kill me". :dry:

I am also not going to make assumptions as to an intruders attentions. I take my life and family's very seriously. To potential intruders approaching my home it will almost always be "STFO" instead of "GTFO".

[Snee]

You see that's where that street shit comes in.

It's not about being a pussy. It's about making you do what the fuck they want and sometimes flexing.

Sure it is, or rather it's about fear, they bring the guns 'cos they don't think they will be able to handle the situation, unless they are armed, and I can't say I find this very irrational either, with so many home owners being armed because they think this is what will save them, why would the criminals be different.


You can't grasp that this happens whether you armed or not. This where I say that maybe the criminal is a little softer. If you equate it the same then I wish we had pussy ass criminals.
You do, you've got criminals with guns robbing little old ladies and whatnot.

If that's not a bunch of sissies I dunno' what is.


j2 and I are going to think we will best an intruder. Anything's possible regarding us being bested. I'm not going roll over like the stereotypical Frenchman and just say, "Kill me". :dry:
A higher IQ doesn't mean everything in a gunfight, again, pointing and shooting doesn't require you to have a phd, and I'm not sure about how much your going to the range will affect who hits who either.

Your intelligence shows in what you've done to avoid that situation, not when triggers start being pulled.


I am also not going to make assumptions as to an intruders attentions. I take my life and family's very seriously. To potential intruders approaching my home it will almost always be "STFO" instead of "GTFO".
There is a such a thing as worrying too much, and the amount of precautions you say you have taken certainly points to you being a first rate worrier.

But our mentality is also different. Rather than spending that much on guns I'd have spent money on bars for my windows, or turned my bedroom into a panic room, or something. Before risking that kind of confrontation you are preparing for I'd have done more to avoid it, assuming I was as worried as you about potential homicidal intruders.

If I'd put bars on my window the message would have been the same, but I'd have gone about it in another way. Not being armed is not akin to rolling over on its own.

[Busyman]

Sure it is, or rather it's about fear, they bring the guns 'cos they don't think they will be able to handle the situation, unless they are armed, and I can't say I find this very irrational either, with so many home owners being armed because they think this is what will save them, why would the criminals be different.
Or rather? It's a multitude of things. The difference is I don't mull through their intentions, whether it's protection or flexing.



You do, you've got criminals with guns robbing little old ladies and whatnot.

If that's not a bunch of sissies I dunno' what is.
I'm not going to go through this "your criminals are pussies our criminals aren't pussies" bullshit. They are all fucking criminals and that in itself ain't no badge of honor.


A higher IQ doesn't mean everything in a gunfight, again, pointing and shooting doesn't require you to have a phd, and I'm not sure about how much your going to the range will affect who hits who either.
It sure helps. I have always maintained that I could still get fucked up even with the guns.


Your intelligence shows in what you've done to avoid that situation, not when triggers start being pulled.
I disagree. It starts with your first point and then can end with your last point.


There is a such a thing as worrying too much, and the amount of precautions you say you have taken certainly points to you being a first rate worrier.
I'm not worrying now.

But our mentality is also different. Rather than spending that much on guns I'd have spent money on bars for my windows, or turned my bedroom into a panic room, or something. Before risking that kind of confrontation you are preparing for I'd have done more to avoid it, assuming I was as worried as you about potential homicidal intruders.

If I'd put bars on my window the message would have been the same, but I'd have gone about it in another way. Not being armed is not akin to rolling over on its own.
Show how I'm not trying to avoid it. There are those that would say, "You got a panic room? You are a first rate worrier." Hell I've been criticized for having a privacy fence and alarm system. I don't like bars on my windows. I can go onnnnnn and onnnnnnnnn.
I refuse to not protect myself and my family to the best of my ability under the law because I may piss a criminal off in hindsight.
If the situation warrants ever backing down then I will do so to protect myself and family.

[JPaul]

The rod is mightier than the gun.

[manker]

Hrm :D

I suppose that means I'm absolutely right about everything I've written. That's hardly a surprise ... still feel cheated tho'.

[JPaul]

I suppose that means I'm absolutely right about everything I've written. That's hardly a surprise ... still feel cheated tho'.
Not everything, ever, but most things, mostly.

[manker]

Sorry but when self-appraising, I only deal in absolutes :snooty:

[Busyman]

SnnY-

Are you also having difficulty divining that this thread is kaput?

As one whose display of intelligence is a joy to observe, I feel I must nonetheless recommend you take a remedial session in determining when the horse has been beaten to death.

You guys are sooooo easy. :)
But j2, what if you get your gun and get a muscle spasm in your arm and then............

[manker]

You suppose wrong, but, hey-what's new? :P A rod straight after a rod is worth two in the GWB :schnauz:

[vidcc]

This is not to cast aspersions on any of you from the other Isles; I am a huge fan of the entire English-speaking world. :D

wasn't there a debate where some suggested we don't need to learn a second language as the rest of the world already speaks English?

[manker]

wasn't there a debate where some suggested we don't need to learn a second language as the rest of the world already speaks English?No :blink:

[hobbes]

wasn't there a debate where some suggested we don't need to learn a second language as the rest of the world already speaks English?


No :blink:

[Busyman]

I never take the safety off until I am done spasming. ;)
Damnit...an answer for everything.
Ok then what if..aww fuck it...I'm calling Snny back in here to take care of my lightwork...

[Snee]

@J2: meh :D you never answered the question though :rolleyes:

@busy: We've done this over and over, and we aren't getting anywhere, I'd chose other things than you in the same situation is all.

You might want to read up on your own replies though, you were the one that said something along the lines of your criminals being tougher.



This argument was always one that existed for its own sake, it doesn't matter to me what you do at home, as we'll probably never meet anyway.

[Snee]

Arrgh

The question was how you'd beat them using your superior brains if it came to a point where you and they were face to face, guns drawn, and all that.

Truth be told I don't think there's a good answer to that :P

This as I sort of think that your intelligence shows in what you've done to avert the situation, and that what happens in case of an armed confrontation (on this scale) is hard to influence by having the greater mind. No offense.

Guns are a great (in a very frightening way) equalizer, when it comes to these things, I think.

I'm still working on getting this to a 1000 posts, like :D

[Snee]

The whole point to my previous argument (with regards to this situation) was that the efficiency of the signs didn't require you to have a gun, though :P the gun is an entirely different animal and should be treated separately :D

(If it did come to him coming looking for you, gun in hand and all, any signs saying "I have a gun" will have warned him, and you are in deep doody then, gun or not, should it come to that.)

Really, I might well have done everything you would, apart from getting the gun, myself, was I sufficiently motivated.

I think we understand each other now, anyhow.

[vidcc]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people...but so do monkeys...if you give them a gun :rolleyes:

[Everose]

I do not own a gun. (well, unless you consider that I live in a community property marriage-law state)

I am scared of guns. Have never held, loaded, or even seen what a 'safety' looks like.

The only time it has been loaded in my presence was when a man was loose in my neighborhood after having murdered his brother and sister in law. My husband kept it on the floor by his chair until we got news that they had found this man. Then he unloaded it and put it back.

I have to say I felt a little safer in this situation with a loaded gun and someone who knows how to use one, if necessary. Had I seen a glimpse of any boisterous, vigilante behavior on his part....I might have been more scared of that than the murderer.

Since I do not have his training and knowledge of guns, I am thinking if I was home alone and heard intruders, I would be safer hiding under the bed instead of grabbing an unloaded gun that I do not know how to load.

It has never been a big issue between us. He never brings it out around me, but has mentioned that if I wish, he will take me to the country and teach me how to load and use it. He is sensitive to my fear and would be the best teacher I could find.

My question is...........since there is a gun in the house, would I be better off knowing how to use it...........or should I go on as is.....fearing it? :unsure:

[Tago Mago]

"Never go to clubs with metal detectors. Sure it feels safe inside. But what about all those niggas waiting outside with guns? They know you ain't got one."

Chris Rock quotes

[DRACOJOE2]

Well where I live just about everyone ownes a gun. I have around 12 myself. Pistol's shotguns rifle's and an AK 47 assault rifle with 30 round clips. All legal here. If someone broke in my home I sould turn them into swiss cheese as they entered no questions asked. All legal here. I have owned guns since I was a teen and know how to use one as good or better than anyone that could confront me. It is my American right to bear arms and I will do so for the defence of me my family and my property so to all the passive non gun owning peeps thats your choice but dont expect me to to give up guns just because you don't like them. Peace yall

[JPaul]

Peace yall
Would it be offensive if I were to note that I could hear the faint twang of a lone banjo.

Oh wait, no, it's duelling.

[MCHeshPants420]

Well where I live just about everyone ownes a gun. I have around 12 myself. Pistol's shotguns rifle's and an AK 47 assault rifle with 30 round clips. All legal here. If someone broke in my home I sould turn them into swiss cheese as they entered no questions asked. All legal here. I have owned guns since I was a teen and know how to use one as good or better than anyone that could confront me. It is my American right to bear arms and I will do so for the defence of me my family and my property so to all the passive non gun owning peeps thats your choice but dont expect me to to give up guns just because you don't like them. Peace yall


An assault rifle? Do you have problems with robots sent back from the future in your local area? Are the local burgulars led by Hans Gruber? :unsure:

[JPaul]

An assault rifle? Do you have problems with robots sent back from the future in your local area? :
No, the AK 47 is the choice of the terrorist, not the chrono-crime fighter.

[enoughfakefiles]

Well where I live just about everyone ownes a gun. I have around 12 myself. Pistol's shotguns rifle's and an AK 47 assault rifle with 30 round clips. All legal here. If someone broke in my home I sould turn them into swiss cheese as they entered no questions asked. All legal here. I have owned guns since I was a teen and know how to use one as good or better than anyone that could confront me. It is my American right to bear arms and I will do so for the defence of me my family and my property so to all the passive non gun owning peeps thats your choice but dont expect me to to give up guns just because you don't like them. Peace yall

http://img104.echo.cx/img104/4865/chad8bc.jpg

[RPerry]

No, the AK 47 is the choice of the terrorist, not the chrono-crime fighter.

I must say I agree with you, homeowners have no business with an assult rifle :dry:

[RPerry]

My question is...........since there is a gun in the house, would I be better off knowing how to use it...........or should I go on as is.....fearing it? :unsure:

My personal opinion is, if you have one in the house, you should know how to use it

[100%]

My personal opinion is, if you have one in the house, you should know how to use it

and when not to use it

[Mr JP Fugley]

and when not to use it
ever

[DRACOJOE2]

No, the AK 47 is the choice of the terrorist, not the chrono-crime fighter.
I like my AK. They are good guns and fun to shoot and one heck of a personal protection device LOL. One point I want to make is that some people do not have enough sense to own a gun period. People that drink alot, take drugs, hot tempered or just mentaly unstable sould never own a gun. They would end up shooting someone over nothing and end up in prison. But that is exactly why i own them. There are alot of stupid people out there that do have one and if it came down to me or them it would have to be them. :D

[Snee]

Where's the bazooka?

Can't have a complete collection without a bazooka.

[DRACOJOE2]

That may be my next big purchase. Im gonna go down the pawn shop tomorrow and see if they have one.

[Everose]

and when not to use it


Yes, RPerry, thanks. I think you are right. The gun is in the house. I should at least know the basics about it. I think I have avoided learning those because of the counter point 15% brought up here. By this I mean that if I go on not knowing how to use it, I don't have to make the decision about whether to use it or not.

If alone, my first choice would still be to try to exit the house quietly upon hearing someone break in. Things can be replaced.

If my little granddaughters were here, they sleep at the other end of the home, and that would change any split second decision I would make.

[DRACOJOE2]

Learn how to shoot it. You may even like it. :naughty:

[Mr JP Fugley]

Police Officers, who are highly trained and who carry guns on a daily basis, shoot the wrong person - sometimes. They shoot innocent bystanders, either by aiming at the wrong person or by missing and hitting someone else.

Many of them, even when they shoot the "right" person, have to go into therapy after having done so. I think for some Police forces it is mandatory, whether the person wants it or not.

I am comforted that you chaps feel confident enough to carry a firearm, in the knowledge that you will not shoot a member of your own family by mistake and that you will be able to live after having killed someone. Your experience of such situations will ensure that no tragic accidents occur, coz' you're really good at making decisions when your head is swimming with the massive amounts of adrenaline your body is releasing.

Oh and before you say you will be really careful, during the seconds that you were making sure, in the dark, whilst in the throes of blind panic, that the person you were aiming at wasn't your spouse the armed burglar has shot you. He has no such qualms, his family aren't in the house and he sees a gun pointed at him.

But that's OK, your husband and kids won't need to get a new video, coz he ran away without it. Stupid burgular.

[Biggles]

Of course, one could just get fully automated Goalkeeper turrets fitted at the each corner of the house. :shifty:

[vidcc]

with my security system i don't need guns

http://www.gonemovies.com/WWW/MyWebFilms/Oorlog/RaidersOfTheLostArk_4.jpg

http://www.nostalgiacentral.com/images_movie/raiders_03.jpg

[crysmileyguy!]

does a banana count as a gun? :shifty:

:crying:

[DRACOJOE2]

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/joe_and_the_babies.jpg :w00t: :w00t: :w00t:

[enoughfakefiles]

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/joe_and_the_babies.jpghttp://www.6th.org.uk/Members/Images/lockstock.jpg

:blink:

[manker]

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/joe_and_the_babies.jpg :w00t: :w00t: :w00t:I've just been looking at your sighost account.

You look really gay in this pic :happy:

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe/draco_in_dales_pit.jpg

[GepperRankins]

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/lg886940972.jpg


some kind of mouse?

[Mr JP Fugley]

I've just been looking at your sighost account.

You look really gay in this pic :happy:

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe/draco_in_dales_pit.jpg

I like this one

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/joe_and_helton.jpg

[JPaul]

Joe-

It seems our friends from across the pond have made a target of you.

Good luck. :huh:
Oh I think that was self-induced old bean.

Jo has posted some rather ghey pics of herself on t'interweb. Then practically begged the right thinking element to view them.

Any subsequent harshness can only be viewed as a force of nature. The title of the first pic "joe_and_the_babies.jpg" really puts the proverbial "tin lid" on it.

This is another good one

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe2/dale_jr_blvd_lowes_speedway_2004.jpg

and again the banjo can be heard.

[Busyman]

Don't worry Joe. There ain't nothin' wrong with your pics.

Anyone can find unfavoring pictures. Even though I'm not into NASCAR here's a decent one.
http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe4/draco_at_the_final_southern_500_darlington_2004.jpg

[manker]

Don't worry Joe. There ain't nothin' wrong with your pics.Nice to see Busy agreeing with me for a change.

If there ain't nothin' wrong, then something must be awry :happy:

[manker]

http://www.sighost.us/members/dracojoe3/lucy_pickle.jpg

:lol: http://www.sighost.us/members/danb/glag.gif

[Busyman]

Well it seems we've gone off-topic to rag on DracoJoe 'cause he owns guns.

He doesn't agree with the European majority and so he gets ragged.

Rooting around his sighost account is one thing but calling him ghey is another (not that anything's wrong with that - Jerry Seinfeld).

No problem with the guns, no problem with your pics. (sorry for posting one myself). That's pretty cool you being in the NASCAR pit.

Draco these villagers are used to pitchforks and torches. :ph34r:

[manker]

Well it seems we've gone off-topic to rag on DracoJoe 'cause he owns guns.

He doesn't agree with the European majority and so he gets ragged.

Rooting around his sighost account is one thing but calling him ghey is another (not that anything's wrong with that - Jerry Seinfeld).

No problem with the guns, no problem with your pics. (sorry for posting one myself). That's pretty cool you being in the NASCAR pit.

Draco these villagers are used to pitchforks and torches. :ph34r:Hypocritical bollocks.

You tell us off in a schoolmasterly stylee and then liken us to narrow-minded medieval witch burners.


You may have a point - I can be a git - but at least I'm consistent in that and don't go preaching benevolence when other people do it :dry:

[Busyman]

Hypocritical bollocks.

You tell us off in a schoolmasterly stylee and then liken us to narrow-minded medieval witch burners.


You may have a point - I can be a git - but at least I'm consistent in that and don't go preaching benevolence when other people do it :dry:
This difference is he has said nothing offensive yet you are having a go at him due merely to his gun ownership beliefs.

Pretty fucked up.

[manker]

This difference is he has said nothing offensive yet you are having a go at him due merely to his gun ownership beliefs.

Pretty fucked up.I have a go at a variety of individuals for their weird ideas and opinions.

Gun ownership isn't sacrosant. It's also irrelevant - if anyone posted a link to pics like that, I'd take the piss regardless.

Get off your high horse.

[GepperRankins]

This difference is he has said nothing offensive yet you are having a go at him due merely to his gun ownership beliefs.

Pretty fucked up.
meh only larfed at the campness. it's not that bad. i'd expect the same from anyone. i think manker has already had some :shifty:

i look forward to some jibes tonight :D :01:

[manker]

Yup, I've already given you a bit in t'lounge :D

[Busyman]

I have a go at a variety of individuals for their weird ideas and opinions.

Gun ownership isn't sacrosant. It's also irrelevant - if anyone posted a link to pics like that, I'd take the piss regardless.

Get off your high horse.
No one said it was sacrosanct. However, the picture (not the link) was posted as it relates to "Do you own a gun?" and not "hey here's a ghey pic". :ermm:

The Lounge is your urinal for pissing, so-to speak.

It has nothing to do with a high-horse. I'd understand you ragging on me for instance but shit wait for someone to, at the very least, fuck with you....especially when they are merely posting their view on owning a gun and doing so with utmost decorum.

[manker]

No one said it was sacrosanct. However, the picture (not the link) was posted as it relates to "Do you own a gun?" and not "hey here's a ghey pic". :ermm:

The Lounge is your urinal for pissing, so-to speak.

It has nothing to do with a high-horse. I'd understand you ragging on me for instance but shit wait for someone to, at the very least, fuck with you....especially when they are merely posting their view on owning a gun and doing so with utmost decorum.If everyone waited for the first stone to be cast on the interweb, it would be a pretty dreary place - are you suggesting that I should not rag on anyone til I am first ragged upon.

Surely that's a bit much to expect. Why expect me to keep to a special Busyman code of ethics while giving others an exemption licence.

You're talking shite.

Btw, this is the off-topic poll section. If something goes off-topic then it's all good :)

[Mr JP Fugley]

Wasn't he one of the chaps who said that anyone who didn't have a personal arsenal was a ghey pussy not able to defend themselves or their loved ones.

[GepperRankins]

Wasn't he one of the chaps who said that anyone who didn't have a personal arsenal was a ghey pussy not able to defend themselves or their loved ones.
no it was busy who called you a bad parent for not putting your family in mortal danger ;)

[Busyman]

If everyone waited for the first stone to be cast on the interweb, it would be a pretty dreary place - are you suggesting that I should not rag on anyone til I am first ragged upon.

Surely that's a bit much to expect. Why expect me to keep to a special Busyman code of ethics while giving others an exemption licence.

You're talking shite.

Btw, this is the off-topic poll section. If something goes off-topic then it's all good :)
Gotta point with the last one. ;)

Rag away. :dry:

[Busyman]

Wasn't he one of the chaps who said that anyone who didn't have a personal arsenal was a ghey pussy not able to defend themselves or their loved ones.
Nope not anyone.

JPaul started in with name calling......


Well you're a panzy-ass wimp that would beg like a bitch rather than protect your family.

I was waiting for your bullshit behind my post.

I collected those items over a number of years (17) since I've studied martial arts since childhood.

Almost all of them (besides the guns and mace) aren't even located at my house (they are in storage) yet I own them.

You take little tidbits and make horrid assumptions. It seems like I can do the same about you.

Some protector...no father figure growing up?

[manker]

Rag away. :dry: Tbh, I was pretty much done but then you drew attention to it :unsure:

[Busyman]

Tbh, I was pretty much done but then you drew attention to it :unsure:
I know :shifty: ....well actually I didn't. :unsure:

[Mr JP Fugley]

Nope not anyone.

JPaul started in with name calling......

You quoted yourself. :blink:

[Busyman]

You quoted yourself. :blink:
:blink: DUH!!! Ya huh. :blink:

[GepperRankins]

surely if you were saying JP started it you should have quoted JP starting it, not you flaming him