quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Man defends his family the wrong person gets caught in the crossfire and instead of going after the attacker you persecute the homeowner, this is what passes for justice in England?

Me, I just find it revolting that anyone could pass off the death of an innocent as a result of 'crossfire'. Like, people blowing their guns off all over the place is somehow normal behaviour - move swiftly beyond that sort of thing, which is as natural as the weather - and talk about who's righteous and who isn't. It *isn't* "normal" and "natural". "Crossfire" is what happens only in a fucked up social system that has arse-licked the gun lobby too much and for far too long.

Allowing people to go outside and blast away with firearms is just primitive, Bama. A grown-up society just doesn't condone that kind of behaviour. In a grown up society people - all people - would be shocked at even seeing a man standing in the street with a gun aimed at someone.

Funny. I didn't hear Bama "passing off" the death of a girl. I don't think anyone wants the death of innocent people Peon - and it is rather uncouth to suggest Bama does.

Kind of like your insinuation about Mengele. We that support gunrights do so - warts and all - because we believe Mao. "Power flows from the mouth of a gun".
We tolerate, sadly, the death of innocents as a necessary cost to prevent the massive loss of life that occurs by state sanctioned violence.

Mao - 40 million.
Stalin - 40 million
Hitler - 30 million
Khmer rouge 8 million
Darfour
Ruanda
Armenia
...

if you total up the death by political persecution - the total dwarfs the accidental deaths by gun violence. Would hitler have exterminated the jews if they had guns - and used them? Would stalin have killed the peasants by famine if they had had guns - and used them?

Tyrants prey upon the powerless...

I did a little research on rebellions in the US outside of the Civil War, we had 3 large scale one, John Brown at Harper Ferry is well know and we know what happen. Then some 4,000 rebels in what was called "Shay's Rebellion of which after a few rounds of government grape shot from their cannons the rebel either surrendered or ran, some 30 rebels were either killed or wounded no government forces were scratched. Then the Whiskey Rebellion were some 7,000 farmers took up arms of a new Whiskey tax. Washington took command of a force of some 13,000 ill equipped force, some did not even have a musket or rifle and when the rebels saw them coming surrendered without a shot being fired. Washington later became the countries #1 Whiskey maker. So Tyrants prey upon the powerless? yeah right. Oh Stalin and Hitler were elected. Mao was popular with the people.

Kirata spell check please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

The fact that Hitler was elected

Actually Hindenburg was elected, in order to get the support of the Nazi party in the runoff election he had to make Hitler Chancellor. Hitler used the national emergency clause to give himself "temporary" power. Hitler being elected is one of the great myths of the 20th century.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Man defends his family the wrong person gets caught in the crossfire and instead of going after the attacker you persecute the homeowner, this is what passes for justice in England?

Me, I just find it revolting that anyone could pass off the death of an innocent as a result of 'crossfire'. Like, people blowing their guns off all over the place is somehow normal behaviour - move swiftly beyond that sort of thing, which is as natural as the weather - and talk about who's righteous and who isn't. It *isn't* "normal" and "natural". "Crossfire" is what happens only in a fucked up social system that has arse-licked the gun lobby too much and for far too long.

Allowing people to go outside and blast away with firearms is just primitive, Bama. A grown-up society just doesn't condone that kind of behaviour. In a grown up society people - all people - would be shocked at even seeing a man standing in the street with a gun aimed at someone.

Funny. I didn't hear Bama "passing off" the death of a girl. I don't think anyone wants the death of innocent people Peon - and it is rather uncouth to suggest Bama does.

Kind of like your insinuation about Mengele. We that support gunrights do so - warts and all - because we believe Mao. "Power flows from the mouth of a gun".
We tolerate, sadly, the death of innocents as a necessary cost to prevent the massive loss of life that occurs by state sanctioned violence.

Mao - 40 million.
Stalin - 40 million
Hitler - 30 million
Khmer rouge 8 million
Darfour
Ruanda
Armenia
...

if you total up the death by political persecution - the total dwarfs the accidental deaths by gun violence. Would hitler have exterminated the jews if they had guns - and used them? Would stalin have killed the peasants by famine if they had had guns - and used them?

Tyrants prey upon the powerless...

I did a little research on rebellions in the US outside of the Civil War, we had 3 large scale one, John Brown at Harper Ferry is well know and we know what happen. Then some 4,000 rebels in what was called "Shay's Rebellion of which after a few rounds of government grape shot from their cannons the rebel either surrendered or ran, some 30 rebels were either killed or wounded no government forces were scratched. Then the Whiskey Rebellion were some 7,000 farmers took up arms of a new Whiskey tax. Washington took command of a force of some 13,000 ill equipped force, some did not even have a musket or rifle and when the rebels saw them coming surrendered without a shot being fired. Washington later became the countries #1 Whiskey maker. So Tyrants prey upon the powerless? yeah right. Oh Stalin and Hitler were elected. Mao was popular with the people.

Kirata spell check please.

Such a tyro.
As a general rule, Nosathro, people don't elect tyrants. They become tyrants after election. The fact that Hitler was elected has *nothing* to do with the question of would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not.

And - just to correct your knowledge of history. Hitler *disarmed* the jews prior to the holocaust. What a coincidence, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

I told you, I'm sure for the SC's law he was justified, but that doesn't change the fact he acted like an irresponsible jackass from the beginning, and the law allowed him to do it, that should be quite disturbing. I know you don't care what other country do but making clear you just can't act like john wayne in his movies seems the lowest bar to me, but it seems that critizeing john wayne characters' ways is un-american so...

You see that he didn't break the law but we should punish him anyway?
If they had driven by and shouted insults he would be in jail.

There is white, there is black and there are infinite shades of gray, he was for sure in a very dark legal gray area even for the SC law, so he's not the picture of honesty and rightness he is a jackass with a good lawyer, in a very permissive state when it comes to self defence, that did something not necessary and killed someone who was there to help.

What you should understand is for many people this is not different from the case in UAE where the norwegian girl reported a rape and ended up in jail, it was the law there but I dare you to say it is a fair law. This case show how some of the united states are starting a "new wild west", have fun.

What you should understand is that they are wrong.
In fact the person who followed the law is the one many people want locked up.
So persecuting Scott is doing the same thing the UAE did.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Such a tyro.
As a general rule, Nosathro, people don't elect tyrants. They become tyrants after election. The fact that Hitler was elected has *nothing* to do with the question of would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not.

And - just to correct your knowledge of history. Hitler *disarmed* the jews prior to the holocaust. What a coincidence, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


Such a tyro.
As a general rule, Nosathro, people don't elect tyrants. They become tyrants after election. The fact that Hitler was elected has *nothing* to do with the question of would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not.

And - just to correct your knowledge of history. Hitler *disarmed* the jews prior to the holocaust. What a coincidence, eh?

Were belgian jews disarmed by hitler before the war? were french jews disarmed by hitler before the war? were polish jews disarmed by hitler before the war? were dutch jews disarmed by hitler before the war? were jews' houses and shops burned by hitler in person or by law abiding gun owner's groups?
The answer is they would just died quicker but not fewer!

quote:


Too bad it was too little and too late. Phydeaux makes an excellent point ".........would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not."

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


I said a grieving family fed evidence by people with an ax to grind.
She said quite clearly that she wants a trial so these things can be taken into consideration.
The authorities view is clearly that he didn't commit a crime, thus his immunity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Too bad it was too little and too late. Phydeaux makes an excellent point ".........would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not."

Fantasy land stuff. If the Jews had been armed with handguns, their Nazi oppressors would have had machine guns - as indeed they did during the Warsaw Ghetto risings, which is one reason why those risings were crushed so tragically easily. The State always has way more fire power than individual citizens. The Jews never would have been able to kill one German each (and even if they had, the Nazi High Command would have had replacements on hand) - and six million Jews would still have died.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

lovmuffin when I read your posts I wonder if you are lobbying for gun producers in various forums as a job or if you are just brainwashed by lobbies' propaganda.

quote:

lovmuffin :

It's also interesting to note that 20 or so years of gun control initiated by dushebag British politicians had effectively disarmed its citizens. Americans stepped up to fill the void sending arms and ammo to the British citizens as they were in fear of a Nazi invasion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:


Too bad it was too little and too late. Phydeaux makes an excellent point ".........would the germans have had a holocaust if the jews when arrested had killed one german each. Would a million jews have died? Probably. Would six million? Probably not."

Fantasy land stuff. If the Jews had been armed with handguns, their Nazi oppressors would have had machine guns - as indeed they did during the Warsaw Ghetto risings, which is one reason why those risings were crushed so tragically easily. The State always has way more fire power than individual citizens. The Jews never would have been able to kill one German each (and even if they had, the Nazi High Command would have had replacements on hand) - and six million Jews would still have died.

Fantasy stuff indeed to suggest the victims of the holocaust could have prevented it if they had been armed, this against an army capable of invading almost all of Europe. Thats the dishonest bullshit always thrown about by the gun lobbyists.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

lovmuffin :

It's also interesting to note that 20 or so years of gun control initiated by dushebag British politicians had effectively disarmed its citizens. Americans stepped up to fill the void sending arms and ammo to the British citizens as they were in fear of a Nazi invasion.

Typical bullshit post. There were no small arms exchanged until after the fall of France. Most British equimpent had been abandoned prior to then, during the evacuation from Dunkirk.