Urgent!

[Dagmar]

Original post by jack-ass:

 

"But the thread is about air riffles, you cant realy hunt with a air-gun, can you? The people who own them are usually kids and they only get into trouble with them. Or they hurt each other or are killing little birds or harming cats etc... So its a bloody good idea to ban the things."

 

You really need to calm down. The vast majority of kids using air guns do so under expert supervision, either from parents or through gun clubs etc. Those who go around causing problems would still cause them whether they had a gun or not.

 

Any ban on air guns would be nothing more than a piece of contol freakery from a government of buffoons who have no idea how to curb the activity of feral scum. Further resrictions on the law abiding majority whether gun owners or car drivers has little or no effect on criminals who have little to fear from the police or courts.

 

Perhaps more kids learning to shoot in a controlled enviornment would help to instil a bit of personal responsibility and an understanding that their actions have consequences.

 

 

 

Give a child a gun ...they'll have some fun!

[PeteB]

Hurrah for that post! Only the dumb want to stop the responsible whilst the "feral scum" take not a blind bit of notice (or possibly laugh) at the end result and carry on as before.

 

Out with Gordon and the rest of these irresponsible hipocrits that WE voted in!

[Big Tom]

next thing you know we wont be able to take a crap. This is rubbish, This just means that that the 12 bore is gunna be takin care of rats

[tockmal]

from a government of buffoons who have no idea how to curb the activity of feral scum.

 

feral scum? really? is that your answer to complex social issues? calling people feral scum throws us back about 200 years and is detrimental to any notion of achieving a civil society.

 

By calling people feral scum you have shown that you have given up. To you there are two types of people - feral scum and normal people, right?

 

The Morlocks and the Eloy, right?

 

If thats how you see our society then your opinions are invalid in my opinion.

[Mr Ed]

feral scum? really? is that your answer to complex social issues? calling people feral scum throws us back about 200 years and is detrimental to any notion of achieving a civil society.

 

By calling people feral scum you have shown that you have given up. To you there are two types of people - feral scum and normal people, right?

 

The Morlocks and the Eloy, right?

 

If thats how you see our society then your opinions are invalid in my opinion.

 

It must be nice living in your little pink fluffy world... :wave:

[Oakwilt]

Here in America, attempts at being "diplomatic" and polite in using, say, Robert's Rules of Order or established processes of redress has obviously gained nothing in changing the course of a corrupt government. Our elections hold some historical promise, but alas, the corporate domineers are faster on their feet and quicker with their bucks than the general population which has become dumber and fatter as the super-size burgers and Britney Spear's gain favor as the most important news we hear and believe.

 

I truely think we want to be stupid, as the quickest way from point A to point B is to cheat and our influencial leaders have shown that it alone makes for powerful victories and endless booty. The combined intelligence of our mass of citizenry makes it look almost like keeping weapons OUT of their hands isn't such a bad idea anyway.

 

So on the topic of those who would take more of our dwindling remaining rights away - and also their brain-dead supporters - it's accurate and permissive to label them as "feral scum", at the least. Pack rats and bottom-feeding grass carp show more honor, as do the rank and file of the extremist fundamentalist wacked-out Islamic communities.

 

Eliminate 'gray areas' and call a spade a spade, and a duck a duck.

[tockmal]

it's accurate and permissive to label them as "feral scum",

 

Its easy to label another human being 'feral scum', but what are you, Dagmar and Ed actually going to do to try and make a difference?

 

by using terminology such as this its you guys who have followed the path of least resistance, its people like you who have given up and just accepted things for what they have become, not for what they could be.

 

My reason for banning airguns is simple - as long as there are people who will use them for violence then they should be banned.

[Oakwilt]

Gun ownership, along with other potentially deadly rights as driving a vehicle, vending foodstuffs to the public, flying an aircraft or soldiering in today's disfunctional armed forces used to be partially controlled by common sense and reliable responsibilities, fortified by oversight and simple laws.

 

Look at us now. And I tend to illustrate the US of A as being a wonderfully accurate depiction of abused rights-run-amok. More guns means less criminal behavior? No statistic proves it, quite the opposite.

 

As far as responsible nation and thus culture, again...look at us now. On one hand we have control advocates wishing all arms be recalled (which would seriously impair my ability to eat here in Texas), on the other, we have lobbying efforts to force gun ownership on everyone and allow the public to shoot to kill at will, even if the percieved perpetrator of alleged crime is unarmed (the great State of Florida {George Bush's brother Jeb was governor and got this thru})

 

As it stands currently, even as an avid gun owner, I also would restrict and maybe eliminate gun ownership here given the state of minds of most Americans now (Iraq being a good example of our wonderful intentions for 'democracy'). Half of our population doesn't know where Canada is, and the other half thinks Jesus made dinosaurs. The remaining few, if any, believe we're saving the world from terror and it's okay to kidnap and torture citizens if they don't worship the God we think talks to our president daily.

 

If we ever get back to small businesses succeeding in providing goods and services honestly, jobs that mean and pay something to live on, stopping the poisoning of our own neighborhoods and nations and quit lying about it, electing greedy lying self-serving oil executives to powerful offices and show some basic respect for others who are different instead of the idiotic nationalism, the salutes to the Reich, the Homeland racist rants, the religious fanaticism and rich filthy scum making trillions while grandmother starves, I don't want guns in the hands of people who salute a dream and false promise instead of fairness and compassion unless it's to unite and revolt to change the systems we have no choice but to rely on now - and they ain't working.

 

Guns are okay, as long as they're used to revolt against corruption and occassionally bag that deer that was considerate enough to help feed my family. And an airgun is apprpriate to train a son or daughter to responsibly know what, where and when to shoot.

 

I don't trust us anymore to do that.

[Big Tom]

well said

[tockmal]

Gun ownership, along with other potentially deadly rights as driving a vehicle, vending foodstuffs to the public, flying an aircraft .

 

Guns are designed specifically for killing things, a vehicle may accidently kill someone but it is not designed to be a killing machine the same logic applies to vending foodstuffs to the public and flying an aircraft.

 

The same logic applies to knives, knives have a 1000 other uses other than killing things so to ban them would be pointless. However I would ban the sale of large hunting knives in the UK as they are sold primarily to rambozo dunces who like killing living things for no other reason than it makes them feel powerful for a split second before they return to their permanent macho insecurities.