Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Ramsman Ramsman is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 20/04/2013 20:45, Ramsman wrote:
On 20/04/2013 07:06, G. Morgan wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People like 'Trevor' are responsible for creating 'Gun free zones'
which are the perfect targets for shooting sprees where no one will
shoot back. He is down under, and has no business spouting off about
gun control in the US.


I just told him the same thing.

I also get tired of Eurotrash bad-mouthing our Constitution. For
Chrissakes, they still have queens, prince's, princesses, and kings
ruling over the moral majority (or would that be the majorities'
morals?).


Please provide a list of European countries where royalty rules.

If you're going to make statements like that with no evidence to back
them up, it doesn't do much for what little credibility you do have.

Ranting is no substitute for reasoned argument.

Once again, please tell use where these countries are that are ruled by
a royal family.
[i]
Very few Americans get involved with politics outside of the US, yet the
whole world has a ****ing opinion on *our* politics and law. If they
can't vote here, they need to STFU about it. [g][r][n]



Very few Americans know anything about anything outside the US.


--
Peter
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Gun loons


Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.



Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.



Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.
  #43   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


"G. Morgan" wrote:[i]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People like 'Trevor' are responsible for creating 'Gun free zones'
which are the perfect targets for shooting sprees where no one will
shoot back. He is down under, and has no business spouting off about
gun control in the US.


I just told him the same thing.

I also get tired of Eurotrash bad-mouthing our Constitution. For
Chrissakes, they still have queens, prince's, princesses, and kings
ruling over the moral majority (or would that be the majorities'
morals?).

Very few Americans get involved with politics outside of the US, yet the
whole world has a ****ing opinion on *our* politics and law. If they
can't vote here, they need to STFU about it. [g][r][n]



That's because they have very few rights, and would get locked up or
executed if they mouthed off about their queers, err, Queens.
  #45   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

Guns aren't the problem, and it only takes a second or two to change a
magazine, so the size doesn't make any difference if no one is shooting
back. The problem is that sleazy lawyers got 'rights' for the mentally
ill to be on the streets. A gun is a tool, and doesn't kill by itself.
It takes an unstable person or criminal who places no value on human
life to use one to maim or kill in cold blood.


**Which is why good, strong, sane, homogeneous gun control laws make a
great deal of good sense. Something that does not exist in the US.



You're just afraid that if they locked up everyone who was violent &
insane in the United States, it would spread to your worthless hellhole.


  #47   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Mark Zacharias wrote:

By the way, I'm not really a gun nut. I don't think someone needs an AR-15
to dispatch Bambi.



Even if Bambi is an evil $ insane liberal who builds bombs? ;-)
  #48   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.



So, you're a drug making, bomb building pedophile? That's no
surprise.
  #49   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


wrote:

On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 02:35:09 +0000 (UTC), Roger Blake
wrote:

On 2013-04-21, Trevor Wilson wrote:
"...well regulated militia..." do you not understand?


"Well regulated" at the time the Constitution was written meant "well
practiced" or "well trained." Perhaps in Australia it is different,
but here in the U.S. one of the most fundamental axioms of law is that
the intent of the lawmaker is the force and effect of the law. You do
not get to change that effect simply because the popular use of a word
or phrase changes over time.


Correct, but the larger point here is that only one who is completely
ignorant of both logic and the English language can believe that a
subordinate clause in any way modifies the independent clause.

Time for a change.


Hard to argue with that. Experts and world leaders throughout history
agree with you. Idi Amin, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler,
Pol Pot, Mao Tse-Tung, Kim Jung-Il, Musmammar Qaddafi, and others have
found central regulation and strict control over firearm ownership to
be quite effective in implementing their respective societies.


If the moron Aussie believes that it's time to change the US
Constitution, the instructions are self-contained. (Hint: he has no
clue and clearly impotent in the matter)



Let him come to the US and start knocking on doors to demand that
people give him their guns & ammo. Make sure he doesn't understand
"Stand your ground" or "Castle Law".
  #50   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Charles wrote:

Thought I was on a repair forum.

Sorry.



We know you're sorry. You are also ignorant or maybe stupid, in that
you can't read headers, or filter out cross posted threads.


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/22/2013 6:01 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:[i]

"G. Morgan" wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People like 'Trevor' are responsible for creating 'Gun free zones'
which are the perfect targets for shooting sprees where no one will
shoot back. He is down under, and has no business spouting off about
gun control in the US.


I just told him the same thing.

I also get tired of Eurotrash bad-mouthing our Constitution. For
Chrissakes, they still have queens, prince's, princesses, and kings
ruling over the moral majority (or would that be the majorities'
morals?).

Very few Americans get involved with politics outside of the US, yet the
whole world has a ****ing opinion on *our* politics and law. If they
can't vote here, they need to STFU about it. [g][r][n]



That's because they have very few rights, and would get locked up or
executed if they mouthed off about their queers, err, Queens.


**Really? Got any recent evidence to prove that (WRT to the British
Monarch)?


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #53   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/22/2013 1:44 AM, Ramsman wrote:[i]
On 20/04/2013 20:45, Ramsman wrote:
On 20/04/2013 07:06, G. Morgan wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People like 'Trevor' are responsible for creating 'Gun free zones'
which are the perfect targets for shooting sprees where no one will
shoot back. He is down under, and has no business spouting off about
gun control in the US.

I just told him the same thing.

I also get tired of Eurotrash bad-mouthing our Constitution. For
Chrissakes, they still have queens, prince's, princesses, and kings
ruling over the moral majority (or would that be the majorities'
morals?).


Please provide a list of European countries where royalty rules.

If you're going to make statements like that with no evidence to back
them up, it doesn't do much for what little credibility you do have.

Ranting is no substitute for reasoned argument.

Once again, please tell use where these countries are that are ruled by
a royal family.

Very few Americans get involved with politics outside of the US, yet the
whole world has a ****ing opinion on *our* politics and law. If they
can't vote here, they need to STFU about it. [g][r][n]



Very few Americans know anything about anything outside the US.



**Sad, but true. So much power in the hands of so many ignorant people.
George W Bush is a prime example. A hugely ignorant man, who did much
damage to the planet.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Gun loons

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.



Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane?


**What makes you think that everyone from Australia is insane? What
makes you think that a person who posts common-sense, logic and reason,
is insane?


Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.


**Again: Post some facts to back your abject stupidity and we'll listen
to what you have to say.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #55   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/21/2013 1:53 PM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2013-04-21, Trevor Wilson wrote:
**No. That is what YOU think it means. Either way, at the time the 2nd


Wrong. For example, see:

http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm


**Liek I said: What YOU think is irrelevant.



Amendment was written, their was no official US armed forces. There is
now. And, it is the most formidable armed force on the planet. A
citizen's militia is now unnecessary.


Irrelevant.


**Highly relevant.


**Indeed. Which is why the 2nd Amendment is more tha 100 years overdue
for change.


I disagree.


**Why?


**That old chestnut. I'll bite.


History shows us clearly that governmens are not to be trusted.

List the SPECIFIC changes made to firearms laws by your cited people.


Look them up yourself.


**I accept your inability to prove your point.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au


  #56   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Gun loons

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.



Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.


**I should add that, despite your peculiar insanity, I do not regard ALL
Americans as ignorant, gun loving morons. I reserve those sorts of
comments solely for NRA supporters and George W Bush voters. The other
150 million Americans may well be decent, intelligent people.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #57   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/22/2013 1:31 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

On 4/21/2013 11:41 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

**And I will repeat:

The 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.

So, I take it that you believe the Freedom of Speech clause in the First
Amendment only applies to speaking from atop a soapbox at the local park
(no voice amplification), handwritten letters and documents/newspapers/
books printed using a screw press. It does not apply to radio, television,
modern high speed printing presses, the Internet or anything involving
amplification, electronics or any other technology developed since the
late 1700s?


**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.


That's not the point. If the 2nd only applies to the technology of the
time of its passage (inaccurate muskets) then, to be consistent, the 1st
can only apply to the technology of the time of its passage. Meaning only
handwritten text, newspapers printed with a screw press and yelling from
atop a box at a street corner.


**Precisely. You may care to note that, despite the 1st Amendment, truly
free speech does not exist in the US.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #58   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/22/2013 6:14 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.



So, you're a drug making, bomb building pedophile? That's no
surprise.


**You are one ignorant ****.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #59   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Like any rabid NRA supporter, who is incapable of forming an
individual thought, YOU have no idea what I think.




The problem is that you don't think, and you never will. I don't
belong to the NRA, and I never have. I am a US Army Veteran who
believes in all of our amendments, including the Second Amendment. You
harp about free speech, yet try to deny that right to others.
  #60   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 1:31 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

On 4/21/2013 11:41 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

**And I will repeat:

The 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.

So, I take it that you believe the Freedom of Speech clause in the First
Amendment only applies to speaking from atop a soapbox at the local park
(no voice amplification), handwritten letters and documents/newspapers/
books printed using a screw press. It does not apply to radio, television,
modern high speed printing presses, the Internet or anything involving
amplification, electronics or any other technology developed since the
late 1700s?


**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.


That's not the point. If the 2nd only applies to the technology of the
time of its passage (inaccurate muskets) then, to be consistent, the 1st
can only apply to the technology of the time of its passage. Meaning only
handwritten text, newspapers printed with a screw press and yelling from
atop a box at a street corner.


**Precisely. You may care to note that, despite the 1st Amendment, truly
free speech does not exist in the US.




yawn.............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....


  #61   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 6:14 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.



So, you're a drug making, bomb building pedophile? That's no
surprise.


**You are one ignorant ****.



You can't stand the truth, so you proudly display your stupidity.
  #62   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/21/2013 1:53 PM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2013-04-21, Trevor Wilson wrote:
**No. That is what YOU think it means. Either way, at the time the 2nd


Wrong. For example, see:

http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm


**Liek I said: What YOU think is irrelevant.



So much for your claim of Freedom of Speech.
  #63   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Gun loons


Trevor Wilson wrote:

**What makes you think that everyone from Australia is insane? What
makes you think that a person who posts common-sense, logic and reason,
is insane?



You're just like Phil Allison, and Bill Sloman. The three of you
give Australia a black eye on Usenet. I rarely see anyone else posting
from Oz.
  #64   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default Gun loons


Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.



Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.


**I should add that, despite your peculiar insanity, I do not regard ALL
Americans as ignorant, gun loving morons. I reserve those sorts of
comments solely for NRA supporters and George W Bush voters. The other
150 million Americans may well be decent, intelligent people.



You have no clue who I support, so you just act like a monkey and
fling your ****.
  #65   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:27:33 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:
[i]
On 4/22/2013 1:44 AM, Ramsman wrote:
On 20/04/2013 20:45, Ramsman wrote:
On 20/04/2013 07:06, G. Morgan wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People like 'Trevor' are responsible for creating 'Gun free zones'
which are the perfect targets for shooting sprees where no one will
shoot back. He is down under, and has no business spouting off about
gun control in the US.

I just told him the same thing.

I also get tired of Eurotrash bad-mouthing our Constitution. For
Chrissakes, they still have queens, prince's, princesses, and kings
ruling over the moral majority (or would that be the majorities'
morals?).


Please provide a list of European countries where royalty rules.

If you're going to make statements like that with no evidence to back
them up, it doesn't do much for what little credibility you do have.

Ranting is no substitute for reasoned argument.

Once again, please tell use where these countries are that are ruled by
a royal family.

Very few Americans get involved with politics outside of the US, yet the
whole world has a ****ing opinion on *our* politics and law. If they
can't vote here, they need to STFU about it. [g][r][n]



Very few Americans know anything about anything outside the US.



**Sad, but true. So much power in the hands of so many ignorant people.
George W Bush is a prime example. A hugely ignorant man, who did much
damage to the planet.


Idiot. What does "outside the US" have to do with the US
Constitution?


  #66   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:10:27 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:

On 4/22/2013 1:31 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

On 4/21/2013 11:41 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
Trevor Wilson writes:

**And I will repeat:

The 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.

So, I take it that you believe the Freedom of Speech clause in the First
Amendment only applies to speaking from atop a soapbox at the local park
(no voice amplification), handwritten letters and documents/newspapers/
books printed using a screw press. It does not apply to radio, television,
modern high speed printing presses, the Internet or anything involving
amplification, electronics or any other technology developed since the
late 1700s?


**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.


That's not the point. If the 2nd only applies to the technology of the
time of its passage (inaccurate muskets) then, to be consistent, the 1st
can only apply to the technology of the time of its passage. Meaning only
handwritten text, newspapers printed with a screw press and yelling from
atop a box at a street corner.


**Precisely. You may care to note that, despite the 1st Amendment, truly
free speech does not exist in the US.


You're a liar, but we all already knew that.
  #67   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:10:58 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:

On 4/22/2013 6:14 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**And there's the rub: Freedom of speech also applies to instructions on
bomb-building, preparation of toxins and other substances, paedophile
materials, along with fear-mongering and hate-inciting materials.



So, you're a drug making, bomb building pedophile? That's no
surprise.


**You are one ignorant ****.


A perfect example of your best reasoned argument.
  #68   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/22/2013 11:40 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Like any rabid NRA supporter, who is incapable of forming an
individual thought, YOU have no idea what I think.




The problem is that you don't think, and you never will.



**First you claim to know what I think, then you claim that I don't
think. You don't know what I think.

I don't
belong to the NRA, and I never have.



**Doesn't matter. You parrot their words.

I am a US Army Veteran who
believes in all of our amendments, including the Second Amendment.



**Really?

You "believe in" the 18th Amendment?
You "belive in" the 21st Amendment?

Which is it?

You
harp about free speech, yet try to deny that right to others.


**Do I? When did I do that?

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #69   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Gun loons

On 4/22/2013 11:46 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.


Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.


**I should add that, despite your peculiar insanity, I do not regard ALL
Americans as ignorant, gun loving morons. I reserve those sorts of
comments solely for NRA supporters and George W Bush voters. The other
150 million Americans may well be decent, intelligent people.



You have no clue who I support,


**You are an NRA supporter. Regardless of your membership status. Your
words betray you. NRA supporters are idiots. Evil idiots.


so you just act like a monkey and
fling your ****.


**No. I deal in facts.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
  #70   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 07:32:06 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:

On 4/22/2013 11:40 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Like any rabid NRA supporter, who is incapable of forming an
individual thought, YOU have no idea what I think.




The problem is that you don't think, and you never will.



**First you claim to know what I think, then you claim that I don't
think. You don't know what I think.


You just proved you can't read or think.

I don't
belong to the NRA, and I never have.



**Doesn't matter. You parrot their words.


Because the NRA spoke the truth doesn't change the fact that it is the
truth.

I am a US Army Veteran who
believes in all of our amendments, including the Second Amendment.



**Really?

You "believe in" the 18th Amendment?
You "belive in" the 21st Amendment?

Which is it?


Idiot. Learn something about the Constitution.

You
harp about free speech, yet try to deny that right to others.


**Do I? When did I do that?


Many times, moron.


  #71   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Gun loons

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:22:46 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:

On 4/22/2013 11:46 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a "loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain English.


Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated ass.


**I should add that, despite your peculiar insanity, I do not regard ALL
Americans as ignorant, gun loving morons. I reserve those sorts of
comments solely for NRA supporters and George W Bush voters. The other
150 million Americans may well be decent, intelligent people.



You have no clue who I support,


**You are an NRA supporter. Regardless of your membership status. Your
words betray you. NRA supporters are idiots. Evil idiots.


so you just act like a monkey and
fling your ****.


**No. I deal in facts.


Wow! Now *THAT'S* FUNNY!
  #72   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
tm tm is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Gun loons


wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:22:46 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote:

On 4/22/2013 11:46 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/22/2013 5:59 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 2:22 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and
their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Of course, you are a well known loon.


**If pointing out the abject stupidity of US gun control laws (such
as
they are), by using logic, reason and common-sense, makes me a
"loon",
then I guess you have some serious problems in dealing with plain
English.


Why is that it everyone who post from down under is insane? Of
course, 'rageaudio' tells everyone that you are just an opinionated
ass.


**I should add that, despite your peculiar insanity, I do not regard
ALL
Americans as ignorant, gun loving morons. I reserve those sorts of
comments solely for NRA supporters and George W Bush voters. The other
150 million Americans may well be decent, intelligent people.


You have no clue who I support,


**You are an NRA supporter. Regardless of your membership status. Your
words betray you. NRA supporters are idiots. Evil idiots.


so you just act like a monkey and
fling your ****.


**No. I deal in facts.


Wow! Now *THAT'S* FUNNY!



Jeez, is it something in the water?

I am the NRA!

  #73   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
William Sommerwerck William Sommerwerck is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

"Roger Blake" wrote in message
...

Trevor clearly does not believe in the natural right to self-defense
that so many of the U.S. founders spoke of and enshrined in the
2nd Amendment, and instead wants to trust government, an
institution historically bathed in the blood of innocents.


As a statist who believes that the fundamental purpose of government is to
PROTECT individual rights -- a point made in the Constitution -- I have no
problem with "reasonable" controls on the ownership and use of weapons. My
definition of "reasonable" pretty much begins and ends with keeping weapons
out of the hands of criminals and the irresponsible. I do not see requiring
background checks on everyone who purchases a weapon as un-reasonable --
unless it can be shown that such checks are ineffective.

People clearly do not "need" assault rifles. But there are lots of things
people don't "need". I'm bothered about outlawing any "unneeded" thing unless
we have a good idea of the consequences. (I have yet to hear a discussion of
the effects of the previous ban on assault weapons.) Too many laws are passed
because they reflect a view of how the world ought to be, rather than how it
actually is.

As for "slippery slopes"... Power tends to draw more power to itself. ANY
regulatory law creates its own slippery slope.

As for the blood of innocents -- let's start with the innocent people killed
in environmental and engineering disasters, due to the greed of business.
Money is power -- or didn't you know that? This country is in the process of
returning power to Big Business, where it resided in the 19th century.

PS: I've been watching "The Rifleman" on MeTV. It's a fascinating program,
with outstanding episodes alternating with appalling garbage (including a
story in which the central dramatic conflict is resolved by an attack by a man
in a bad bear costume). In one episode, Lucas wins a 12ga shotgun in a
contest, which he puts aside for Mark "until he's ready for it". (In this
context, "ready" means knowing how to use it responsibly.) Though this makes
sense, it is out of context, as "rural" children were -- and still are --
taught to use firearms. The teaching is part of the process of learning
responsible use.

  #74   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 09:41:07 -0500, G. Morgan
wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 4/20/2013 3:53 PM, G. Morgan wrote:
Who the **** posted this **** to all these groups? The OP didn't even
cite who the "kike" is.

Newsgroups:
sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt. sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car

Trevor Wilson wrote:

Face it, the 2nd Amendment was written:

Face it, the 2nd Amendment was written in the United States. If some
Aussie has a problem with it, just don't come here and you'll be just
fine.

I really don't understand why people that are outside of the US think
they are allowed to opine on the 2nd. I don't tell you what kind of
boomerang you can carry.


**We call it: 'Freedom of speech'. An interesting concept you should
learn about.


Freedom of speech? Your diversion noted.

That's not the crux of the issue, it's about why anyone outside of the US
thinks they can opine on our laws and make statements like "time to
change". No... You don't live here and that means you don't get to vote
on it. It's not a human rights issue, so the international community has
no say.

Stupid septic.


Nice sig.


What would you expect from Ron Reaugh? It *is* him.
  #75   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Don Kelly Don Kelly is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 19/04/2013 9:29 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Don Kelly wrote:

On 18/04/2013 8:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

**What part of "....well regulated militia..." do you not understand.

Face it, the 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.
* At a time when dangerous animals roamed free.
* At a time when a vicious colonial power ruled America.
* At a time when angry indigenous people roamed free.
* At a time when refrigeration was unheard of.

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Thank you- some common sense coming out. (the vicious colonial power
excepted-the Mel Gibson movie is not a historically valid reference).
In a later time- prior to and after the war of 1812 fiasco- it was
expected that "Canadians" were to carry and use arms in defense of their
country.An obligation -not a right. It was always noted that, as a
frontier country, that there would be a need to have arms and training
in the use of these arms for defense was required (and the need for
providing fresh meat was also rather important).
What I don't understand is the need for an assault weapon for defense
dragging it out from under the pillow to shoot at the horde of home
invaders (or late returning children) who are after one's virtue ( if
their intention was otherwise they would solve this problem earlier)- or
for hunting (instant hamburger?). The term "assault" comes to mind.
These weapons are not intended for defense but are intended to throw a
lot of bullets in the assumed direction of an enemy. If someone innocent
gets in the way it is "collateral damage".
A gun registry may be of limited or no use. The banning of weapons that
can spray a theater or school with bullets can help and doesn't infringe
on a right to bear arms. This wouldn't affect the responsible gun owners
but could reduce the availability of such weapons to the kooks.
I am not a US citizen and as such, all I can do is stand by in dismay at
what some; in a country I respect and whose people I have met and lived
with ( as well as claim as relatives) who are warm, helpful, friendly,
supportive of strangers and just good neighbors; have this gun fetish
based on ??



Guns aren't the problem, and it only takes a second or two to change a
magazine, so the size doesn't make any difference if no one is shooting
back. The problem is that sleazy lawyers got 'rights' for the mentally
ill to be on the streets. A gun is a tool, and doesn't kill by itself.
It takes an unstable person or criminal who places no value on human
life to use one to maim or kill in cold blood.


I disagree in part-any legal limitations don't mean a damn to
criminals-but what you have is a situation where any kook can walk into
a store and buy a gun, or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks. The "rights" should be limited- do
you have a "right" to drive a car- I don't think so- you have the
privilege- provided that you present information as to your ability to
do it within conditions of capability. Shouldn't the same be done with
respect to weapons?
As to reloading magazines- true-just think, instead of firing 50
rounds into a movie theater, one has to stop after 10 to reload. Even
that is too much.
As for shooting back- the odds are that in such a firefight, the
collateral damage is high-my experience with an automatic (or semi-)
weapon is that it tends to walk around a lot from where it is aimed. Oh
****- spraying bullets around hit some innocent people- while the
intended target is unharmed- witness gang shootouts.
I do think a "long gun" registry doesn't work- but restrictions on
particular weapons do help. Illegal weapons do get into criminal hands-
but facts may indicate that making these weapons licit increases the
chance of innocents being harmed. The old west idea of gunfights as a
form of duel - may well be fiction- it is easier to shoot an opponent in
the back that to walk down the street and duel to appropriate music.
Anyhow, I can disagree with you -but it will not be beyond the extent
of arguing over which of us is to buy the next round if we ever meet.





--
Don Kelly
remove the cross to reply


  #76   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 21:58:41 -0700, Don Kelly wrote:

On 19/04/2013 9:29 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Don Kelly wrote:

On 18/04/2013 8:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

**What part of "....well regulated militia..." do you not understand.

Face it, the 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.
* At a time when dangerous animals roamed free.
* At a time when a vicious colonial power ruled America.
* At a time when angry indigenous people roamed free.
* At a time when refrigeration was unheard of.

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Thank you- some common sense coming out. (the vicious colonial power
excepted-the Mel Gibson movie is not a historically valid reference).
In a later time- prior to and after the war of 1812 fiasco- it was
expected that "Canadians" were to carry and use arms in defense of their
country.An obligation -not a right. It was always noted that, as a
frontier country, that there would be a need to have arms and training
in the use of these arms for defense was required (and the need for
providing fresh meat was also rather important).
What I don't understand is the need for an assault weapon for defense
dragging it out from under the pillow to shoot at the horde of home
invaders (or late returning children) who are after one's virtue ( if
their intention was otherwise they would solve this problem earlier)- or
for hunting (instant hamburger?). The term "assault" comes to mind.
These weapons are not intended for defense but are intended to throw a
lot of bullets in the assumed direction of an enemy. If someone innocent
gets in the way it is "collateral damage".
A gun registry may be of limited or no use. The banning of weapons that
can spray a theater or school with bullets can help and doesn't infringe
on a right to bear arms. This wouldn't affect the responsible gun owners
but could reduce the availability of such weapons to the kooks.
I am not a US citizen and as such, all I can do is stand by in dismay at
what some; in a country I respect and whose people I have met and lived
with ( as well as claim as relatives) who are warm, helpful, friendly,
supportive of strangers and just good neighbors; have this gun fetish
based on ??



Guns aren't the problem, and it only takes a second or two to change a
magazine, so the size doesn't make any difference if no one is shooting
back. The problem is that sleazy lawyers got 'rights' for the mentally
ill to be on the streets. A gun is a tool, and doesn't kill by itself.
It takes an unstable person or criminal who places no value on human
life to use one to maim or kill in cold blood.


I disagree in part-any legal limitations don't mean a damn to
criminals-but what you have is a situation where any kook can walk into
a store and buy a gun, or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks.


The above is a deliberate lie. Dealers at gun shows have to perform
the same background check as any other dealer. Always have.

The "rights" should be limited- do
you have a "right" to drive a car- I don't think so- you have the
privilege- provided that you present information as to your ability to
do it within conditions of capability. Shouldn't the same be done with
respect to weapons?


Where does the Constitution mention cars? How do cars *PROTECT* life?

As to reloading magazines- true-just think, instead of firing 50
rounds into a movie theater, one has to stop after 10 to reload. Even
that is too much.


Wrong again. Even that is ridiculous. You *obviously* know nothing of
what you speak.

As for shooting back- the odds are that in such a firefight, the
collateral damage is high-my experience with an automatic (or semi-)
weapon is that it tends to walk around a lot from where it is aimed. Oh
****- spraying bullets around hit some innocent people- while the
intended target is unharmed- witness gang shootouts.


The facts prove you wrong, but that's to be expected from *ANY* gun
grabber.

I do think a "long gun" registry doesn't work- but restrictions on
particular weapons do help.


Bull****. Proof required.

Illegal weapons do get into criminal hands-
but facts may indicate that making these weapons licit increases the
chance of innocents being harmed.


What "facts"? You've stated none.

The old west idea of gunfights as a
form of duel - may well be fiction- it is easier to shoot an opponent in
the back that to walk down the street and duel to appropriate music.
Anyhow, I can disagree with you -but it will not be beyond the extent
of arguing over which of us is to buy the next round if we ever meet.


"Buy the next round"? A rather unfortunate choice of words, eh?
  #77   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
(PeteCresswell) (PeteCresswell) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

Per Don Kelly:
or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks.


That's the one that bugs me, but nobody in the news media seems to pick
up on it.

Personally, I'm not so sure that background checks accomplish all that
much. I'm not rabidly against them. I could go either way... OTOH
Bloomberg seems to be for them big time And whether one approves of him
or not, one must concede that Bloomberg is no dummy.

But requiring background checks (with all the attendant administrative
overhead) in one venue and not requiring them in another
readily-available venue I find extremely offensive.

Time and money down the drain.

Either do it right or do away with it.
--
Pete Cresswell
  #78   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
[email protected] krw@attt.bizz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:48:09 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per Don Kelly:
or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks.


That's the one that bugs me, but nobody in the news media seems to pick
up on it.

Personally, I'm not so sure that background checks accomplish all that
much. I'm not rabidly against them. I could go either way... OTOH
Bloomberg seems to be for them big time And whether one approves of him
or not, one must concede that Bloomberg is no dummy.


Doomberg, no dummy? The biggest big-government nanny of them all?
Good grief! You really don't like your personal freedoms much.

But requiring background checks (with all the attendant administrative
overhead) in one venue and not requiring them in another
readily-available venue I find extremely offensive.


Hint: You've fallen for another lefty lie. The exact same background
checks are required at a gun show as they are in a brick-and-mortar
store (and "Internet sales" must go through a local licensed dealer,
in any case).

Time and money down the drain.

Either do it right or do away with it.


Learn something about what you're talking about or don't talk.
  #79   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
tm tm is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control


"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
news
Per Don Kelly:
or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks.


That's the one that bugs me, but nobody in the news media seems to pick
up on it.

Personally, I'm not so sure that background checks accomplish all that
much. I'm not rabidly against them. I could go either way... OTOH
Bloomberg seems to be for them big time And whether one approves of him
or not, one must concede that Bloomberg is no dummy.

But requiring background checks (with all the attendant administrative
overhead) in one venue and not requiring them in another
readily-available venue I find extremely offensive.

Time and money down the drain.

Either do it right or do away with it.
--
Pete Cresswell


Have you ever been to a gun show? It sure sounds like you have not.

There are very few private sales at gun shows. Mostly just dealer tables and
they ALL require background checks.

Take in a show sometime and at least you will be more knowledgeable on the
subject.




  #80   Report Post  
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.sports.football.pro.sd-chargers,alt.engineering.electrical,rec.audio.car
Trevor Wilson Trevor Wilson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 776
Default Typical Kike on Gun Control

On 4/24/2013 10:39 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 21:58:41 -0700, Don Kelly wrote:

On 19/04/2013 9:29 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Don Kelly wrote:

On 18/04/2013 8:36 PM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

**What part of "....well regulated militia..." do you not understand.

Face it, the 2nd Amendment was written:

* At a time when reload times were measured in MINUTES, not milliseconds.
* At a time when accuracy of muzzle-loading weapons was inferior to a
bow and arrow.
* At a time when dangerous animals roamed free.
* At a time when a vicious colonial power ruled America.
* At a time when angry indigenous people roamed free.
* At a time when refrigeration was unheard of.

**Of course. Equally as moronic as those who defend the NRA and their
gutless politicians they have in their pocket.


Thank you- some common sense coming out. (the vicious colonial power
excepted-the Mel Gibson movie is not a historically valid reference).
In a later time- prior to and after the war of 1812 fiasco- it was
expected that "Canadians" were to carry and use arms in defense of their
country.An obligation -not a right. It was always noted that, as a
frontier country, that there would be a need to have arms and training
in the use of these arms for defense was required (and the need for
providing fresh meat was also rather important).
What I don't understand is the need for an assault weapon for defense
dragging it out from under the pillow to shoot at the horde of home
invaders (or late returning children) who are after one's virtue ( if
their intention was otherwise they would solve this problem earlier)- or
for hunting (instant hamburger?). The term "assault" comes to mind.
These weapons are not intended for defense but are intended to throw a
lot of bullets in the assumed direction of an enemy. If someone innocent
gets in the way it is "collateral damage".
A gun registry may be of limited or no use. The banning of weapons that
can spray a theater or school with bullets can help and doesn't infringe
on a right to bear arms. This wouldn't affect the responsible gun owners
but could reduce the availability of such weapons to the kooks.
I am not a US citizen and as such, all I can do is stand by in dismay at
what some; in a country I respect and whose people I have met and lived
with ( as well as claim as relatives) who are warm, helpful, friendly,
supportive of strangers and just good neighbors; have this gun fetish
based on ??


Guns aren't the problem, and it only takes a second or two to change a
magazine, so the size doesn't make any difference if no one is shooting
back. The problem is that sleazy lawyers got 'rights' for the mentally
ill to be on the streets. A gun is a tool, and doesn't kill by itself.
It takes an unstable person or criminal who places no value on human
life to use one to maim or kill in cold blood.


I disagree in part-any legal limitations don't mean a damn to
criminals-but what you have is a situation where any kook can walk into
a store and buy a gun, or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and
do it -without any background checks.


The above is a deliberate lie. Dealers at gun shows have to perform
the same background check as any other dealer. Always have.


**There is little to stop a person who has a clean record form walking
into a gun show, buying whatever guns they are asked to buy, by someone
waiting outside the show. This is PRECISELY the method used by the
Columbine killers to obtain at least one of their guns. It is a stupid
loop-hole and one which can easily be closed.


The "rights" should be limited- do
you have a "right" to drive a car- I don't think so- you have the
privilege- provided that you present information as to your ability to
do it within conditions of capability. Shouldn't the same be done with
respect to weapons?


Where does the Constitution mention cars? How do cars *PROTECT* life?

As to reloading magazines- true-just think, instead of firing 50
rounds into a movie theater, one has to stop after 10 to reload. Even
that is too much.


Wrong again. Even that is ridiculous. You *obviously* know nothing of
what you speak.

As for shooting back- the odds are that in such a firefight, the
collateral damage is high-my experience with an automatic (or semi-)
weapon is that it tends to walk around a lot from where it is aimed. Oh
****- spraying bullets around hit some innocent people- while the
intended target is unharmed- witness gang shootouts.


The facts prove you wrong, but that's to be expected from *ANY* gun
grabber.


**Cite these alleged "facts" you speak of.


I do think a "long gun" registry doesn't work- but restrictions on
particular weapons do help.


Bull****. Proof required.


**Australia introduced bans on certain firearms in 1996, to deal with
the crime of mass murder, via gunshot. In the 18 years prior to 1996,
there were 13 incidences of mass murder, via gunshot. Since 1996, there
have been none.


Illegal weapons do get into criminal hands-
but facts may indicate that making these weapons licit increases the
chance of innocents being harmed.


What "facts"? You've stated none.


**10,000 Americans are shot to death each year.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you think typical studios would do this? [email protected] Pro Audio 6 July 7th 08 09:49 PM
Typical Uses for Classic Compressors Haolemon Pro Audio 4 August 10th 06 02:24 AM
typical audio impedances [email protected] Pro Audio 8 June 12th 06 04:01 AM
ADC distortion typical near 0dB?? [email protected] Pro Audio 11 January 18th 06 06:35 PM
New Deck Typical outputs Bentley Bear Car Audio 5 July 27th 03 10:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:56 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"