Kennedy 0 #251 December 17, 2003 to dehijack the thread: good news for a change coming out of DC NRA Press Release QuotePresident Bush Meets With NRA To Discuss Sportsmen`s Issues Tuesday, December 16, 2003 On Friday December 12, President George W. Bush invited the NRA, along with 20 other sportsmen`s organizations, to the White House to discuss issues of concern to hunters and sportsmen. Also attending the meeting were Interior Secretary Gale Norton and Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman. During this meeting, the President reaffirmed his personal commitment to hunting, fishing, and sportsmen`s issues. Additionally, Secretaries Norton and Veneman, along with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Steve Williams, presented an overview of Bush Administration wildlife and conservation initiatives, including the opening of 50 additional National Wildlife Refuges to hunting and fishing. Also discussed was the need for the Administration to work with folks in local communities, including local gun clubs, when formulating new policies that impact hunting lands, such as increased exploration of natural resources. "We were pleased to hear President Bush express both his steadfast support for America`s hunting traditions and his recognition of the economic contribution that sportsmen make to the economy," said David Lehman, NRA-ILA Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel. "It is refreshing to see a President and an Administration that supports America`s sportsmen, and actively works to increase hunting opportunities and hunter access to federal lands. We look forward to continuing to work with President Bush and his Administration on these important issues."witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #252 December 17, 2003 Well would you look at this: more good news, this time from the Jersey Journal QuoteCity drops its suit against gun makers Paperwork, deadlines are cited by attorneys Monday, December 15, 2003 By Jason Fink Journal staff writer Jersey City has dropped its lawsuit against handgun manufacturers, citing the mounting paperwork associated with the case and what attorneys say are legal deadlines that will be close to impossible to meet. The decision to voluntarily withdraw the suit, which was filed in state Superior Court in Jersey City in March, comes on the heels of dismissals of similar cases both in New Jersey and nationwide. Mayor Glenn D. Cunningham and city Corporation Counsel Karen DeSoto, however, said they believe the city still has a case and vowed that the suit will be filed again at a future date yet to be determined. "We do want to go back to court," Cunningham said last week. "We're looking at all options." Cunningham said the city is looking at whether to file a new suit in state or federal court, and that he expects a decision within the next three to four months. Opponents of the suit, which was withdrawn last month, portrayed the decision as a victory for advocates of gun owners and as further evidence that the trend among cities, states and counties of suing gun makers for the costs associated with gun violence is misguided. Lawrence Braico, regional vice president of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, an affiliate of the National Rifle Association, called the suit a waste of time and money. "There is now plenty of legal precedent affirming that the firearms industry cannot be held legally responsible for the acts of criminals when they use a lawful, non-defective firearm to commit violent acts," Braico, a North Bergen resident, said in a written statement. The city had joined forces with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in working on the suit. A senior attorney with the Washington-based non-profit organization said dropping the suit was simply a way of buying more time. "Rather than pull all the documentation together while the case is ongoing, the city wanted to do it before it refiles," said Brian Siebel, the Brady Center attorney. Siebel and DeSoto both said they objected to the amount of documents sought by the defendants - which included gun makers Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Glock and Colt - as well as the type of information requested, such as detailed police reports about gun-related homicides. "What they're trying to do is make it as burdensome for the city as possible," said Siebel. Messages left with representatives of the gun manufacturers were not returned last week. A spokesman for Cunningham, Stan H. Eason, said the legal work was handled by the Brady Center and by the city's Law Department and that no outside legal fees were incurred during the roughly eight months the suit was in court. Since 1998, 33 municipalities and counties - including Newark, Camden County, New York and Chicago - have filed similar suits. Cases filed by Camden, New York State, Miami-Dade County, Fla. and Chicago have been dismissed. Officials involved in the suits have said the goal of the litigation has been more to force changes in the ways gun manufacturers produce and market their products than to win large settlements. "If you buy a pack of cigarettes, there is a warning that they could be harmful to your health," said Cunningham. "There is no such warning on guns." Braico called the lawsuit an "end-run around the legislative branch of government through the perverted manipulation of the judicial branch." witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #253 December 17, 2003 Eh, I knew it couldn't last. From the Santa Fe New Mexican: QuoteCourt to Hear Concealed-Gun Issue By DEBORAH BAKER | Associated Press The state Supreme Court has decided to hear arguments next month in a challenge to a new law that allows New Mexicans to carry concealed, loaded handguns. The court on Thursday set oral arguments for Jan. 5. A children's advocacy group and a physician sued last month, alleging the law violates the state constitution. They want the court to block the Department of Public Safety from issuing concealed-carry licenses beginning in January. The attorney general, representing the department, said in written arguments submitted to the court last month that the law is constitutional and the challenge should be dismissed. The law allows New Mexicans 25 and older to get licenses to carry concealed, loaded handguns if they complete firearms-training courses and pass criminal-background checks. The National Rifle Association has asked to intervene in the case, saying its New Mexico members will be less safe if they can't carry concealed handguns and its members who teach firearms-safety training will lose income. The NRA, in a brief filed last week with the court, also disputed claims by opponents of the law that it would put children at risk by making guns more available. "Nothing in the Act endangers children, increases the accessibility of handguns to children or causes accidental shootings or youth suicide," the NRA said. At issue is a constitutional provision that says citizens may keep and bear arms for security and defense and other lawful purposes, "but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons." New Mexico Voices for Children contends that provision makes the new law unconstitutional. DPS and Attorney General Patricia Madrid contend the language simply means the constitution does not specifically grant citizens the right to carry concealed weapons. But neither does it forbid them from doing so, and the Legislature can make laws regulating concealed carry, they said. If the court ruled the constitution barred concealed handguns, it would "radically alter long-established and deeply held rights and practices of both ordinary citizens and peace officers," they argued. A state law from the 1950s allows police to carry concealed handguns and citizens to keep loaded, concealed handguns in their vehicles and homes.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #254 December 17, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteI figured the stuff was out there, but it's more cost effective to just get some good old fashioned home grown C4 and plant it somewhere nasty. BTW, if you happen to invent one, expect a visit from DIA, or another alphabet soup agency. They'll want one, I'm sure. Just a thought: what about the cartridges? Brass casings and lead/metal bullets. Ten to twelve of those might set of the metal detectors. (heck, I've been known to set them off with zero metal on my body) Ceramic bullets (hard nose or fragmenting, your choice) with polymer driving ring, cases like shotgun shells. You're right. After I posted I thought about it for a while, and cartridges would probably be easier than the chamber/barrel switch. What do you mean by polymer drive ring? You mean to seal the gas and take on spin from the barrel? So do you think they are already out there for governments and the like? I'm not sure if the ring would be needed (I'm not a ballistics expert) but I get the impression that copper or polymer rings are used on steel rounds to seal the round against the barrel. Lead won't need it, of course. Large artillery shells have gone to polymer instead of copper for these bands (cheaper, less wear on the barrel). Hey, if I can think of it, I'm sure others have. I must have watched too much "Mission Impossible" as a kid. The barrel and breech would be hard to fabricate since these ceramics are difficult to process and a real pain to machine to tolerance, but, as I said, if the bad guys have really good engineering backing, then TSA won't find them using metal detectors and x-rays. And I don't even know that firearms are the way to go. I can't even begin to imagine what kind of things a good chemist or ChemE could come up with.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #255 December 17, 2003 Try to find a Gyrojet today. It's simply impossible. As I recall, there are only a half dozen or so rounds in existence. On another note, there is caseless ammunition out there already. HK was one company working on a couple projects around caseless ammo for hand-held firearms. There are lots of different materials which could be formed into a barrel which would have little signature on Xray. Maybe more simply, pen guns with caseless ammo. No matter which way you look at it, if someone is determined enough and creative enough with a lot of bux and a few friends in the right place, anything can happen. Personally, I would feel much more secure if pilots were packing, in lieu of my well-concealed personal firearm. mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #256 December 17, 2003 Quote..."If you buy a pack of cigarettes, there is a warning that they could be harmful to your health," said Cunningham. "There is no such warning on guns."... Dude, it's a fucking gun! Cigarettes *used* to be *harmless.* Guns have always been guns. How many warning labels does a gun need? Will a four-year old boy untrained in the proper and safe handling of a firearm stop to read a warning label? The depths of idiocy in some people... mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #257 December 17, 2003 That wa a good one, but I liked QuoteSiebel and DeSoto both said they objected to the amount of documents sought by the defendants - which included gun makers Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Glock and Colt - as well as the type of information requested, such as detailed police reports about gun-related homicides. "What they're trying to do is make it as burdensome for the city as possible," said Siebel. Really? I thought they were trying to figure out what the hell the city was talking aobut and get their hands on enough information to defend themselves. Silly me, trying to use common sense in a courtroom. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #258 December 17, 2003 QuoteQuote..."If you buy a pack of cigarettes, there is a warning that they could be harmful to your health," said Cunningham. "There is no such warning on guns."... Dude, it's a fucking gun! Cigarettes *used* to be *harmless.* Guns have always been guns. How many warning labels does a gun need? Will a four-year old boy untrained in the proper and safe handling of a firearm stop to read a warning label? The depths of idiocy in some people... Not to mention there are warning stickers on my Glock case and several pages of bold print with lots of exclamation points pointint out the dangers and basic safety precautions in the manual that came with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #259 December 17, 2003 QuoteNot to mention there are warning stickers on my Glock case and several pages of bold print with lots of exclamation points pointint out the dangers and basic safety precautions in the manual that came with it. You should see what comes with a Ruger. Some pistols actually have it stamped in the metal that they can be dangerous. Ah, stupidity at work.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #260 December 17, 2003 Interesting article I stumbled across America's Most Wanted Guns Top ten guns used in crime. Amazingly enough, none of them have folding stocks or bayonette lugs. And I believe only one has a standard magazine capacity exceeding 10 rounds. Must be because guns like that are banned. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #261 December 17, 2003 QuoteTop ten guns used in crime. Amazingly enough, none of them have folding stocks or bayonette lugs. And I believe only one has a standard magazine capacity exceeding 10 rounds. Must be because guns like that are banned. Wait for the wierdos to claim that this means the bans work. (Because crimes are now being conducted using other guns). Pretty soon, the only way to hold up a quickie mart will be to threaten the cashier with an SUV... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #262 December 17, 2003 QuotePretty soon, the only way to hold up a quickie mart will be to threaten the cashier with an SUV... Now there's a ban I would support Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #263 December 17, 2003 Ya know, that is simply an amazing story. The ATF released it's top ten list. Pretty simple right? It is until you realize what kind of guns are actually on there. Kinda sucks when the guns you don't like aren't represented on the list. What's an opinionated journalist working for a slanted media source to do????? Appoint herself the expert in the matter!!! Of course!!! She makes herself into the analyst of the data set and twists it to fit her case. Yeah, sure, 70% of the most wanted guns are semi-automatic, but that really doesn't suit the argument now does it? Lets just say that there are just soooooooo many of these other guns (revolvers and pump shotguns), they just happen upon the list because of the volume in circulation. After all as the expert, she says, " Though most teenage gangbangers wouldn't be caught dead with a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver, an old fashioned six shooter, it nonetheless claims the lead on the top ten list." It's the lead by sheer volume in circulation. Riiiiight. I am sure she's got her finger on the pulse of the street and knows exactly what gangbangers prefer. Journalistic integrity--what's that? mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #264 December 18, 2003 QuoteProfessor Patrick Washburn, age 60, of Ohio University, has his office decorated with fishing gear, and an 1878 rifle which his great-grandfather used in the Union Army. QuoteSomebody please explain to me how the man used an 1878 rifle in a war than ended in 1865. Obviously, the author used the phrase "Union Army" to refer to the U.S. Army, which carried on after the Civil War to fight the Indians out west. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #265 December 18, 2003 OMG... LOOK.....Another Gun Thread Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #266 December 18, 2003 QuoteI may not agree with guys like JohnRich (and I find his constant use of statistics which suit his arguments annoying, hence the reason I refused to respond to his usual antics). Yeah, facts will do that to people who want to believe something to the contrary. I'm sorry for the shock I've caused to your belief system. QuoteI am so done with this thread... You've said that a number of times before, and yet you keep coming back! Admit it, you may hate seeing strong arguments against your side of the issue, but you just can't pull yourself away from it. It's like trying to avoid looking at a traffic accident as you drive past it. You can't stand the carnage being waged against the anti-gun position, but you still have to watch it happen. That's okay. You serve as a good foil for us gun guys to introduce new arguments. We actually need you here! QuoteI may not agree with guys like JohnRich... But believe it or not, I respect him. Thank you for that compliment. I try hard to voice my disagreements, without being an ass about it. It sounds like I have succeeded, at least with you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #267 December 18, 2003 QuoteThe sad thing is that this school board was elected by the citizens of Albermarle Co. But when they are elected, no one knows at the time that they are destined to do stupid things in the future. So it's not like you try to imply, that the citizens elect them with advance knowledge of their stupidity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #268 December 18, 2003 QuoteWhat gets into people when they get a little bit of authority that suddenly common sense goes out the window? They try to protect their jobs by using blanket rules so that no one can criticize them for discrimination, for daring to use common sense and make individual decisions based upon circumstances. It's a lot easier just to ban everything and suspend every student for every infraction, then to have to justify individual consideration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #269 December 18, 2003 QuoteOHIO . . . Governor Bob Taft... to veto legislation that has been 20 years in the making... He would use *any* excuse to veto this legislation. 44 states now have concealed carry laws, and none of them have produced any problems. In fact, they demonstrate benefits. Taft should be ashamed of himself for thinking that the citizens of his state are less trustworthy than those of the other 44 states that already have this law. I predict Taft will be defeated in the next election. Texas Governor Ann Richards vetoed the Texas concealed handgun law. George Bush was elected Governor, defeating Richards, using a pledge to sign the concealed carry bill. He was elected, and kept his word and enacted the law. And the rest is now history... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Iflyme 0 #270 December 18, 2003 It must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #271 December 18, 2003 Quotethey objected to the amount of documents sought by the defendants - which included gun makers Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Glock and Colt - as well as the type of information requested, such as detailed police reports about gun-related homicides. How dare those evil gun manufacturers actually make them prove their case! The gall! Quote"What they're trying to do is make it as burdensome for the city as possible," Um, yeah, like the city isn't trying to do the same thing to the gun makers. I guess what's good for the goose, is not good for their gander. Quotethe legal work was handled by the Brady Center and by the city's Law Department and that no outside legal fees were incurredQuote No, but they used the city attorneys to build the case, using local taxpayer money. Those same attorneys and money could have been better spent actually prosecuting the real criminals who wielded those guns to commit crimes. QuoteOfficials involved in the suits have said the goal of the litigation has been more to force changes in the ways gun manufacturers produce and market their products than to win large settlements. Right - since they can't get what they want through the proper legislative channel, they'll just try and sue them into submission, using tax money, from many taxpayers who don't even support what they're doing. These bums should be voted out of office! Quote"If you buy a pack of cigarettes, there is a warning that they could be harmful to your health," said Cunningham. "There is no such warning on guns." I wonder if Mr. Cunningham actually believes that there are people out there who don't already understand that guns can hurt people? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #272 December 18, 2003 QuoteThough most teenage gangbangers wouldn't be caught dead with a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver, an old fashioned six shooter, it nonetheless claims the lead on the top ten list." It's the lead by sheer volume in circulation. Riiiiight. She doesn't seem to realise that maybe the reason revolvers are preferred, is because they don't eject their spent cartridge casings, leaving evidence behind at the crime scene, that may possibly be used to trace the crime gun. Criminals aren't always as dumb as a lot of people think they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #273 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. Opinions from people who aren't willing to put their name behind them, aren't worth much to many readers. I suppose that you think it would be better for people to become victims of violent attack, defenseless to defend themselves? Is that what makes you proud? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites captainpooby 0 #274 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". You dont understand. I dont have to carry a weapon because I fear being attacked. I carry a weapon so I dont fear being attacked. Big difference. By the way, I am Canadian. I would rather live here where there is still some semblance of freedom to protect myself. You will never understand America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #275 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". A friend of mine, who lives in Toronto, was raped last year when someone broke into her apartment. Good thing she didn't need to be afraid of that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next Page 11 of 12 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
JohnRich 4 #267 December 18, 2003 QuoteThe sad thing is that this school board was elected by the citizens of Albermarle Co. But when they are elected, no one knows at the time that they are destined to do stupid things in the future. So it's not like you try to imply, that the citizens elect them with advance knowledge of their stupidity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #268 December 18, 2003 QuoteWhat gets into people when they get a little bit of authority that suddenly common sense goes out the window? They try to protect their jobs by using blanket rules so that no one can criticize them for discrimination, for daring to use common sense and make individual decisions based upon circumstances. It's a lot easier just to ban everything and suspend every student for every infraction, then to have to justify individual consideration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #269 December 18, 2003 QuoteOHIO . . . Governor Bob Taft... to veto legislation that has been 20 years in the making... He would use *any* excuse to veto this legislation. 44 states now have concealed carry laws, and none of them have produced any problems. In fact, they demonstrate benefits. Taft should be ashamed of himself for thinking that the citizens of his state are less trustworthy than those of the other 44 states that already have this law. I predict Taft will be defeated in the next election. Texas Governor Ann Richards vetoed the Texas concealed handgun law. George Bush was elected Governor, defeating Richards, using a pledge to sign the concealed carry bill. He was elected, and kept his word and enacted the law. And the rest is now history... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iflyme 0 #270 December 18, 2003 It must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #271 December 18, 2003 Quotethey objected to the amount of documents sought by the defendants - which included gun makers Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Glock and Colt - as well as the type of information requested, such as detailed police reports about gun-related homicides. How dare those evil gun manufacturers actually make them prove their case! The gall! Quote"What they're trying to do is make it as burdensome for the city as possible," Um, yeah, like the city isn't trying to do the same thing to the gun makers. I guess what's good for the goose, is not good for their gander. Quotethe legal work was handled by the Brady Center and by the city's Law Department and that no outside legal fees were incurredQuote No, but they used the city attorneys to build the case, using local taxpayer money. Those same attorneys and money could have been better spent actually prosecuting the real criminals who wielded those guns to commit crimes. QuoteOfficials involved in the suits have said the goal of the litigation has been more to force changes in the ways gun manufacturers produce and market their products than to win large settlements. Right - since they can't get what they want through the proper legislative channel, they'll just try and sue them into submission, using tax money, from many taxpayers who don't even support what they're doing. These bums should be voted out of office! Quote"If you buy a pack of cigarettes, there is a warning that they could be harmful to your health," said Cunningham. "There is no such warning on guns." I wonder if Mr. Cunningham actually believes that there are people out there who don't already understand that guns can hurt people? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #272 December 18, 2003 QuoteThough most teenage gangbangers wouldn't be caught dead with a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver, an old fashioned six shooter, it nonetheless claims the lead on the top ten list." It's the lead by sheer volume in circulation. Riiiiight. She doesn't seem to realise that maybe the reason revolvers are preferred, is because they don't eject their spent cartridge casings, leaving evidence behind at the crime scene, that may possibly be used to trace the crime gun. Criminals aren't always as dumb as a lot of people think they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #273 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. Opinions from people who aren't willing to put their name behind them, aren't worth much to many readers. I suppose that you think it would be better for people to become victims of violent attack, defenseless to defend themselves? Is that what makes you proud? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites captainpooby 0 #274 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". You dont understand. I dont have to carry a weapon because I fear being attacked. I carry a weapon so I dont fear being attacked. Big difference. By the way, I am Canadian. I would rather live here where there is still some semblance of freedom to protect myself. You will never understand America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #275 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". A friend of mine, who lives in Toronto, was raped last year when someone broke into her apartment. Good thing she didn't need to be afraid of that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next Page 11 of 12 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
JohnRich 4 #272 December 18, 2003 QuoteThough most teenage gangbangers wouldn't be caught dead with a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver, an old fashioned six shooter, it nonetheless claims the lead on the top ten list." It's the lead by sheer volume in circulation. Riiiiight. She doesn't seem to realise that maybe the reason revolvers are preferred, is because they don't eject their spent cartridge casings, leaving evidence behind at the crime scene, that may possibly be used to trace the crime gun. Criminals aren't always as dumb as a lot of people think they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #273 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. Opinions from people who aren't willing to put their name behind them, aren't worth much to many readers. I suppose that you think it would be better for people to become victims of violent attack, defenseless to defend themselves? Is that what makes you proud? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
captainpooby 0 #274 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". You dont understand. I dont have to carry a weapon because I fear being attacked. I carry a weapon so I dont fear being attacked. Big difference. By the way, I am Canadian. I would rather live here where there is still some semblance of freedom to protect myself. You will never understand America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #275 December 18, 2003 QuoteIt must be awful living in a country where the citizens have to carry a concealed weapon for fear of being attacked... I'm proud to live in a nation with strong gun control laws. To quote a line from one of my favorite bands, XTC ... "melt the guns". A friend of mine, who lives in Toronto, was raped last year when someone broke into her apartment. Good thing she didn't need to be afraid of that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
