If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
<IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> Are you speaking of the concept of those religious institutions which provide a public service being refunded in part for the monies the spend in the public service? The religious institution is NOT being funded by the government, but the service that they provide in the public interest is to be contributed to by the government, as it relieves some of the strain upon the government funding for social assistance programs. HUGE DIFFERENCE!!! So terrified of anything resembling a moral structure that you turn nihlist at the concept??? <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
[ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: Thanatos...AGAIN ]
Balddog ~ your choice of Orwell is SO appropo... he would find humor in the concept of Thought Police to arrest those who would dare to have a thought outside of the chosen parameters of the degenerate left... President is STILL a citizen, and is allowed to have an opinion... and there IS a difference between having an opinion and enacting law; THAT is likely too subtle to be noticed. <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
Sexual slander, now? My, haven't you progressed? Tit-for-tat would suggest that your opinion comes from a neutered nutless blunder... THAT describe YOU better?
In truth, firearms benefit those of the "weenie" stature, male, female, or confused upon the issue, more than they benefit me; "The Great Equalizer" ring a bell? Remember where I have been? I have proven totally proficient with taking a life either with an edged instrument, or my bare hands. The firearms put the physically inept on a more even basis with those without the physical inadequacies. <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
THAT would seem to benefit YOU more than me... <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
Thanatos' posts were the funniest ones. who appears to believe that a real man needs a gun. <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Thanatos doesnt need a gun(His job as a Marine notwithstanding), he chooses to carry a gun because he wants to.
That would be called freedom I believe.
The carrying of a firearm brings with it a great resposibility that takes a "real" man to understand properly. A resposibility that you and carriage return may never have or know.
peacechild
The problem is most guns are not in the hands of real men! You see most of the 'good' guys don't want them, and i don't know about you lot but i feel safer when every idiot isn't walking about packing heat <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0">
Yes, Guns carry a terrible responsibility, and that's why I wont carry one, nor would I carry a combat knife. The damage I can do with my hands I have always managed to undo; and has to be deliberate. You can kill with a gun by accident. In my youth I used rifles, I believe I was a fair shot. I took a life without thinking anthing more than "here's a target". I've never held a gun since. I'ts not that I'm squeamish, I have no problem killing (indeed I personally think that anyone who isn't prepared to kill an animal should be a vegetarian), it's the separation of the act - you press a "button" for an instant, something dies.
Bletch.
I was especially sickened by the situation in NY, where you could only volunteer to help through 'your' church.
To continue the trade of insults I fould probably have to go with "frightened fantasy fighter" that certainly is an aspect, without weapons I'm not worth taking on, the risk far outweighs any benefits. Edward Woodward. Great series. Sorry, I don't remember where you have been because I don't know you. I do know where you say you have been.
Even if it were true it doesn't impress me, rather it makes me pity you - especially if your claim are not true and it is merely something that you apsire to.
However there is no big deal about taking life, I am fairly proficient in taking life with knife or bare hand; My personal code prevents me (I hope) from taking a human life. Both occasions where my anger has led me to go too far, I've been able to recussitate.
they also give an advantage to the morally deficient; and that is reason enough that they be banned
[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: Carriage Return ]
Fair enough, but if so then one doesn't need for such a thing to be enshrined in law.
Case (1): There is a 'natural human right' to bear arms. Legal backup of this right unnecessary.
Case (2): There is no 'natural human right' to bear arms. Legal right can be granted, but has no basis in 'natural law,' and so is essentially worthless.
Carry a gun, don't carry a gun. Take responsibility and make the darned decision for yourself rather than running crying to 'declarations of rights.'
Personally I dont think I would carry a weapon but I sure as hell want the choice to decide that for myself.
Police are empowered to apprehend AFTER THE FACT suspected criminals, and deliver them up to the judicial system. In the US, it is NOT their responsibility to "protect you", and they are NOT liable for their inability to do so.
If you think making ANYTHING illegal makes it disappear, you are helplessly and pathetically naive. "If you make guns illegal, ONLY the outlaws will have guns"... is THAT beyond your level of comprehension?
Cities in the US that have enacted MANDITORY firearm ownership legislation have ENDED their murder rate! FACT, not wetdream...
Well known fact: call for a pizza, and call the police, and see who shows up first...
Call "911" (emergency assistance, here) and DIE! Call 1911 (Browning's century old .45 acp) and LIVE!
The sheep will ALWAYS believe that the sheepherder will take care of them...
Adults are NOT victimized by outlaws... you make a conscious choice as to whether you shall be a "victim" or a "combatant". If you are a self-proclaimed and voluntary VICTIM, then enjoy what you shall reap; me, come and get some... you won't "make my day", but I shall CERTAINLY end yours.
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Thanatos...AGAIN ]
Police are empowered to apprehend AFTER THE FACT suspected criminals, and deliver them up to the judicial system. In the US, it is NOT their responsibility to "protect you", and they are NOT liable for their inability to do so.
Then why is their slogan type thing 'to protect and serve'?
If you think making ANYTHING illegal makes it disappear, you are helplessly and pathetically naive. "If you make guns illegal, ONLY the outlaws will have guns"... is THAT beyond your level of comprehension?
no... I'm sure less 'outlaws' would have them tho
Cities in the US that have enacted MANDITORY firearm ownership legislation have ENDED their murder rate! FACT, not wetdream...
[\b]
So you're saying that there is no[\I] murder in any cities where firearm ownership legislation is manditory. Methinks thats a lil' wrong...
Well known fact: call for a pizza, and call the police, and see who shows up first...
Call "911" (emergency assistance, here) and DIE! Call 1911 (Browning's century old .45 acp) and LIVE!
[\b]
unless, of course, you're caught off-gaurd, or the person trying to kill you doesn't know you have a gun, or already has his drawn, or is a psycho, or....
The sheep will ALWAYS believe that the sheepherder will take care of them...
Adults are NOT victimized by outlaws... you make a conscious choice as to whether you shall be a "victim" or a "combatant". If you are a self-proclaimed and voluntary VICTIM, then enjoy what you shall reap; me, come and get some... you won't "make my day", but I shall CERTAINLY end yours.
[\b]
but what if there's someone else out there who will 'certainly end yours' and he's thinking of you. We have two people with guns willing to shoot each other. As well as every other mofo out there who thinks that because they own a gun they are safe from harm.
<IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Major editing to sort out the whole end quote start quote stuff.
Also to say: How off-topic have we got <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
grr, still not got it
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Mindless all the way ]
ok, last try.
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Mindless all the way ]
Fuck it! You work it out. I dunno whats wrong with the damn thing.
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Mindless all the way ]
Been there, said that...
With reference to the topic, I am overjoyed that the US has finally realised that there are terrorists in Ireland.
P.S. Note to Balddog, it wasn't the 'government' which made gun ownership illegal in this country, it was Parliament, there IS a difference. Next you'll tell me that the ban doesn't have public support...
It did have public support, very wide public support......After 16 children had been murdered. Typical kneejerk reaction from the UK politicians.
The fact that the handgun ban has done absolutely nothing to kerb crime seems to have gone over peoples heads. The public are ignorant..How many average Brits do you think know the gun crime levels in this country? How many know that the rate has rocketed since the 97 despite the handgun ban.
The only thing the handgun ban did was to provide a handy scapegoat on which the govt could heap all the countrys frustrations. That scapegoat was the legal pistol shooters.
PS, I think you know that public support is no indicator that something is right.
... an inability to formulate cogent thought? <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
Statistics in towns with mandatory gun ownership is 100% accurate. Who woulda thunk it, right? <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0"> Can't be true, 'cause the REALITY is the antithesis of your emotional delusion, right? <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
btw ~ you, YOURSELF, are probably the greatest example that some should not be trusted to live their own lives... I WILL grant you THAT! <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
I am ASHAMED of you, Balddog! <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0"> Expectations of intelligent and educated sheep? <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0"> SHAME ON YOU! <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
<edit> ...or helped in part BY the handgun ban. <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
[ 06-01-2002: Message edited by: Thanatos...AGAIN ]
<IMG alt="image" SRC="tongue.gif" border="0">
If the murder rate in said towns actually is zero, then I back down and agree that maybe it is a good thing in some cases.
LOL and <IMG alt="image" SRC="tongue.gif" border="0"> to you too!
The Firearms Amendment Act 1997 became law in March 1997. The Labour Party was elected in May.
No matter how much you despise this Govt, you cannot pin this law on them.
The scapegoat wasn't legal pistol shooters, no blame was ever laid at their door. The blame was Hamiltons and his only. The legal owners were effectively punished for his crime by having a gun license removed.
No, except in a democracy the majority decide what is right. Whether you or I agree with them is irrelevant, majority rules.
########
PS You ain't seen me right? <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Original act banned .22 pistols I believe. It was after the Labour govt came to power that the act was amended to include all pistols.
You should know by now that im perfectly happy to blame everything on this govt <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0"> <IMG alt="image" SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0">
Ok legal pistol shooters werent blamed but they sure as hell were the only people punished for Dunblane.
DAMN! <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0"> Youse guys gots a DEMOCRACY o'er thar??? <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0"> Where d'y'all hold them MEETIN'S??? <IMG alt="image" SRC="eek.gif" border="0">
'N' here ah thought y'all had more of a perversion of a republic... <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
Don't know how you can laugh at our system. Your is hardly better, and the fact that every thing Bush wants to do he has to consult the oposistion. Don't remember Blair having to do that. Technically he doesn't have to hold a referendum on anything, he can do wat he wants, although he wouldn't be very popular.
Oh, at least we can design ballot papers.
Yeah and thats turned out well hasnt it <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
At least Bush cares about the US..Blair doesnt give a shit about us. Hes off trying to solve the Kashmir problem in 6 days when the leaders over there couldnt solve it in 50 years. Our rail network has come to an almost total standstill and the transport minister is on fucking holiday..
Great system we have here.
The US system isnt any better but at least their leader works towards the best interests of their country..Ours doesnt even bother to spend most of his time in this country...Hes quite insane, running around trying to solve the worlds problems while our country is going down the bog.
ACTUALLY, what I was commenting on was democracy vs. republic. Last I heard, you had a more representative styled government, rather than each of you attending meetings yourself... <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Ours is a democracy and with a monarchy.
I haven't got the energy to do the American vs British political systems. [I'm sure we did it not so long ago anyway]. <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
Y'all care to define "democracy" and "republic" for those of us with a different level of education? <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0"> Democracy is generally held (on THIS side of the Atlantic) to be a system of government where decisions are made by everybody attending the meeting. Republic is a government where representatives make the laws. <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">