you know the solution. have a car sticker saying this car doesn't have a an imobiliserQuote:
Originally Posted by RPerry
and no i reckon theres something unsexy about a girl with a gun.
and j2k4. what?
Printable View
you know the solution. have a car sticker saying this car doesn't have a an imobiliserQuote:
Originally Posted by RPerry
and no i reckon theres something unsexy about a girl with a gun.
and j2k4. what?
so you're afraid of women as well as guns.... :P pwned :01: :PQuote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
besides, she wasn't just packin a gun,
she had a pair of .38s :w00t: :lol:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPerry
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.
You seem rather uneasy in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
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.
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:
Ouch, you done hurt my thinking muscle.:(Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
J2: I'd reply, but it appears that manker already did it for me.
stupid people use guns to defend themselves, clever ones use ironing boards :ermm:
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
so you don't want to defend your "realm" with a gun but you need to?
The bulk of his post was about the burglar's intelligence, or lack thereof, though :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
And the fact that you haven't really answered as to why that would make a difference.
Yet you still dance a merry jig around the issue without actually adressing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
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.
How? :blink:
Yes, but how will his lower intelligence give you an advantage?
How will it affect what proceeds from there on? As you put it.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
unless maybe your house is the crystal maze, then they'd need some intelligence. you might have an advantage there, but i doubt it
breaking into someone else's property, i would presume they have it ready.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
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.
It's a fairly safe bet.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Not that I'm advocating suing dog-owners whose pet may thwart an illegal intruder - just that lawyers can be sneaky like that.
Did you just call me a mentalist, at all.
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:Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
guns are just another way to reach out and touch someone.
A moot point seeing that it is illegal for you to own one. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by manker
To be nitpicky, I am not armed until they break in.
No it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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
You made it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
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.
but why does everyone run when i wana play!?:gunsmilieQuote:
Originally Posted by Mïcrösöül°V³
Apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
I thought it was illegal in your country.
Nps, easy mistake to make. It's only handguns that are illegal in the UK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
:angry: u got that right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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?
Oh then your law mirrors Washington DC.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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.
@ busy
comprehensive uk gun law guide
sorry if it's too much reading.... this old article from 2000 may helpgive a quick idea
read here
some interesting bits:
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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
See this is my thing...my the fuck don't we tighten our gun laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
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.
No it ain't.Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes
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:
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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... ;)
yes, I posted that probably 20 pages ago about our situation here in AmericaQuote:
Originally Posted by MCHeshPants420
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
I forgot about our rampant drug problem in the equation of things.Quote:
Originally Posted by MCHeshPants420
Good point.
My point is teh banning ain't workin' in teh nation's capital.
Teh average joe doesn't buy burners.