New topic
PrintableStymie said: Not a fair point, Shorty. Guns make into the hands of criminals because non-criminal, law abiding citizens put them there. What they should do is make it so guns have a way to be traced to whomever oringally bought it so that person can be held accountable for the gun crime as well.
I think they can trace it back to the original owner if it was registered. But I don't think that is it fair for someone who has their gun stolen to be charged for a crime they didn't commit. They are the victim of a crime too. However, gun owners should take preventative measures by locking up their guns to keep them away from thieves. [Edited 1/2/07 12:07pm] Wanna hear me sing?  www.ChampagneHoneybee.com | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Shorty said: LleeLlee said: How about valuing life? And not placing people in the position where taking a life is so easy. Killing is not a choice, you dont do it. Taking a gun away from someone (especially somebody who doesn't give a shit about others lives) takes that power away from them and the fear away from everyone else. well sure if we're living in lollipop land maybe we'd all just value life and no one would die...but I sure hope you're not trying to say that there are no criminals in the UK there fore homes in the UK with out guns don't need to protect themselves....cause we know that's just not true. "Gun crime trebles as weapons and drugs flood British cities By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent Last Updated: 12:36am GMT 24/02/2002 GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures obtained by The Telegraph. Police chiefs fear that Britain is witnessing the kind of cocaine-fuelled violence that burst upon American cities in the 1980s. Cocaine, particularly from Jamaica, now floods into Britain, while the availability of weapons - many of them from eastern Europe - is also increasing. Detectives in London say that the illegal importation of guns started after the end of the Bosnia conflict and that they are changing hands for as little as £200. During the 10 months to January 31, there were 939 crimes involving firearms in the Metropolitan Police area compared with 322 in the 10 months to the end of January, 2001 - an almost three-fold increase. In Merseyside there were 57 shootings during the 12 months to last December compared with 15 in the same period the year before. Greater Manchester also recorded a 23 per cent increase in gun crime and there have been rises in Nottinghamshire, Avon and Somerset, West Yorkshire and the Northumbria Police area which covers Newcastle. Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have trebled in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the Home Office. Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said gun gangs were spreading across the country whereas, until recently, they were confined to a handful of London boroughs. Sir John said: "We have to stem the large number of guns coming in. We know you can buy a gun in London for £200 to £300, and that's frightening. The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there are more guns circulating. We are having success; we are taking out about 600 guns a year." The new gun crime figures also show that handgun crime has soared past levels last seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons that followed. The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997, the year after Thomas Hamilton, an amateur shooting enthusiast, shot dead 16 schoolchildren, their teacher and himself in Dunblane, Perthshire. It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics, however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993." I never said there was no gun crime in the U.K, I said it was less frequent than it is in those countries where guns are readily available. No need to quote statistics at me. Yes its growing, but it still has a VERY long way to go before it reaches the dizzy heights as witnessed in the States. Talk about scraping the barrel to make a point.. ... [Edited 1/2/07 12:06pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Thanks to all of you, guys. She and I are very lucky to be alive...and those kids ended up getting Laura's house keys and things with her address on them...she was terrified that they'd show up at her home. The reason I brought all of this up -- it happened about 12 years ago -- is that there is a FACE to gun crime...and these skinny, young kids couldn't have robbed me or my friend without that gun...and if Laura or I would have been carrying a gun I know it would have ended up being much worse. Guns are good for one thing and one thing only -- killing. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control) If we're throwing numbers around.. ... [Edited 1/2/07 12:23pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LleeLlee said: Shorty said: well sure if we're living in lollipop land maybe we'd all just value life and no one would die...but I sure hope you're not trying to say that there are no criminals in the UK there fore homes in the UK with out guns don't need to protect themselves....cause we know that's just not true. "Gun crime trebles as weapons and drugs flood British cities By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent Last Updated: 12:36am GMT 24/02/2002 GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures obtained by The Telegraph. Police chiefs fear that Britain is witnessing the kind of cocaine-fuelled violence that burst upon American cities in the 1980s. Cocaine, particularly from Jamaica, now floods into Britain, while the availability of weapons - many of them from eastern Europe - is also increasing. Detectives in London say that the illegal importation of guns started after the end of the Bosnia conflict and that they are changing hands for as little as £200. During the 10 months to January 31, there were 939 crimes involving firearms in the Metropolitan Police area compared with 322 in the 10 months to the end of January, 2001 - an almost three-fold increase. In Merseyside there were 57 shootings during the 12 months to last December compared with 15 in the same period the year before. Greater Manchester also recorded a 23 per cent increase in gun crime and there have been rises in Nottinghamshire, Avon and Somerset, West Yorkshire and the Northumbria Police area which covers Newcastle. Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have trebled in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the Home Office. Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said gun gangs were spreading across the country whereas, until recently, they were confined to a handful of London boroughs. Sir John said: "We have to stem the large number of guns coming in. We know you can buy a gun in London for £200 to £300, and that's frightening. The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there are more guns circulating. We are having success; we are taking out about 600 guns a year." The new gun crime figures also show that handgun crime has soared past levels last seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons that followed. The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997, the year after Thomas Hamilton, an amateur shooting enthusiast, shot dead 16 schoolchildren, their teacher and himself in Dunblane, Perthshire. It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics, however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993." I never said there was no gun crime in the U.K, I said it was less frequent than it is in those countries where guns are readily available. No need to quote statistics at me. Yes its growing, but it still has a VERY long way to go before it reaches the dizzy heights as witnessed in the States. Talk about scraping the barrel to make a point.. ... [Edited 1/2/07 12:06pm] actually...what you said was "How about valuing life? And not placing people in the position where taking a life is so easy." which I'm sorry....left me to assume (and yes I know what assuming does) that you were implying that the UK has no need for guns in the home cause you guys value life....when in fact we all do value life (as stable law abiding people) but unfortunately that does not change the fact that there IS indeed violent crime that we must sometimes protect ourselves from. The fact I was trying to point out was that despite the fairly recent strict gun laws put in place in the UK....still the gun crimes rise. No need to lash out at me....I'm only have a conversation with you. "not a fan"  yeah...ok | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Shorty said: IAintTheOne said: does he have a concealed weapons permit, here in AZ you can Carry as long as you have that permit,in a store as long as it is seen in a holster its ok. I do not know the law in AZ or most states but...in many states you only need a permit to carry a "concealed" weapon, if you want to carry it openly you usually don't need a permit at all. Most states allow you to own a gun without a license, yet many no longer allow people to "carry" handguns without a license (concealed or otherwise). Don't confuse "ownership of a handgun" with "carrying of a handgun". One may not need a license to "own" a handgun, but that does not give them the legal right to "carry" the handgun "on their body" or "in their vehicle". For example, in Texas, registration/license is not required for me to buy or own a handgun. Now, I do not have the right to leave my home with that handgun in my possession unless I have a "concealed" weopons license. I think they do need to be stricter on the laws. No one (except for law enforcement) should have a need to carry a handgun in public, period, the end. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: Shorty said: well sure if we're living in lollipop land maybe we'd all just value life and no one would die...but I sure hope you're not trying to say that there are no criminals in the UK there fore homes in the UK with out guns don't need to protect themselves....cause we know that's just not true. "Gun crime trebles as weapons and drugs flood British cities By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent Last Updated: 12:36am GMT 24/02/2002 GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures obtained by The Telegraph. Police chiefs fear that Britain is witnessing the kind of cocaine-fuelled violence that burst upon American cities in the 1980s. Cocaine, particularly from Jamaica, now floods into Britain, while the availability of weapons - many of them from eastern Europe - is also increasing. Detectives in London say that the illegal importation of guns started after the end of the Bosnia conflict and that they are changing hands for as little as £200. During the 10 months to January 31, there were 939 crimes involving firearms in the Metropolitan Police area compared with 322 in the 10 months to the end of January, 2001 - an almost three-fold increase. In Merseyside there were 57 shootings during the 12 months to last December compared with 15 in the same period the year before. Greater Manchester also recorded a 23 per cent increase in gun crime and there have been rises in Nottinghamshire, Avon and Somerset, West Yorkshire and the Northumbria Police area which covers Newcastle. Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have trebled in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the Home Office. Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said gun gangs were spreading across the country whereas, until recently, they were confined to a handful of London boroughs. Sir John said: "We have to stem the large number of guns coming in. We know you can buy a gun in London for £200 to £300, and that's frightening. The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there are more guns circulating. We are having success; we are taking out about 600 guns a year." The new gun crime figures also show that handgun crime has soared past levels last seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons that followed. The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997, the year after Thomas Hamilton, an amateur shooting enthusiast, shot dead 16 schoolchildren, their teacher and himself in Dunblane, Perthshire. It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics, however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993." Not a fair point, Shorty. Guns make into the hands of criminals because non-criminal, law abiding citizens put them there. What they should do is make it so guns have a way to be traced to whomever oringally bought it so that person can be held accountable for the gun crime as well. that's not entirely true stymie, many guns make it into criminals hands via theft. "not a fan" yeah...ok | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I used to think that guns were only for killing, and that gun owners must be violent people. There is quite the stigma placed on gun owners. Imagine my surprise when I met folks who see shooting as a sport not remotely related to violence. In fact, target shooting reminded me of archery, and even bowling! Sure, shooting an arrow at someone could kill them, but it's a sport when the arrow shot at a target tacked to a hay bale. It's the same with a gun and bullets. When I go to the range with my man, he is outfitted with safety goggles, ear protection, and is only allowed to shoot in his assigned lane at a paper target. Guns are to remain unloaded until he shooter is in his lane. Shooters also have to wait 3 seconds between shots. Still, with all of these rules and regulations, my man has fun working on his aim, and perfecting his skills. Sometimes I even get a turn. At the end of the day, the reward is a paper target with holes in the bullseye, not dead people. Wanna hear me sing? www.ChampagneHoneybee.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
btw. i grew up with a handgun lying on the kitchen counter of our house. my parent's are retired police officers. Every evening my father came in from work, laid is gun on the kitchen cabinet and started doing things around the house. He took it to bed with him at night. That being said me, nor my brothers, never even attempted to touch it out of curiousity. We were taught early on not to touch it, and no one broke that rule. When my brothers were older, my dad satisfied their curiousity on the shooting range.
Years later, I too became a police officer. I stopped because I became a single mother. After that, I never owned a gun again because as a single parent, I couldn't be there 24/7 to ensure my kids' safety around a weopeon. Growing up in law enforcement, then working in law enforcement, I have seen alot, and still don't feel I need to carry a handgun (even though I can legally still do so). It is a personal preference I have. We each have our own opinions and preferences, that doesn't make my preference or opinion any better than someone else's. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
txladykat said: btw. i grew up with a handgun lying on the kitchen counter of our house. my parent's are retired police officers. Every evening my father came in from work, laid is gun on the kitchen cabinet and started doing things around the house. He took it to bed with him at night. That being said me, nor my brothers, never even attempted to touch it out of curiousity. We were taught early on not to touch it, and no one broke that rule. When my brothers were older, my dad satisfied their curiousity on the shooting range.
Years later, I too became a police officer. I stopped because I became a single mother. After that, I never owned a gun again because as a single parent, I couldn't be there 24/7 to ensure my kids' safety around a weopeon. Growing up in law enforcement, then working in law enforcement, I have seen alot, and still don't feel I need to carry a handgun (even though I can legally still do so). It is a personal preference I have. We each have our own opinions and preferences, that doesn't make my preference or opinion any better than someone else's. Wow, that's cool that you worked as a police officer. My man is interested in a career in law enforcement. Thanks for sharing about your personal experience, and your family.  [Edited 1/2/07 12:57pm] Wanna hear me sing? www.ChampagneHoneybee.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Shorty said: LleeLlee said: I never said there was no gun crime in the U.K, I said it was less frequent than it is in those countries where guns are readily available. No need to quote statistics at me. Yes its growing, but it still has a VERY long way to go before it reaches the dizzy heights as witnessed in the States. Talk about scraping the barrel to make a point.. ... [Edited 1/2/07 12:06pm] actually...what you said was "How about valuing life? And not placing people in the position where taking a life is so easy." which I'm sorry....left me to assume (and yes I know what assuming does) that you were implying that the UK has no need for guns in the home cause you guys value life....when in fact we all do value life (as stable law abiding people) but unfortunately that does not change the fact that there IS indeed violent crime that we must sometimes protect ourselves from. The fact I was trying to point out was that despite the fairly recent strict gun laws put in place in the UK....still the gun crimes rise. No need to lash out at me....I'm only have a conversation with you. I'm sorry you make assumptions that you shouldn't make. I said earlier, if you scroll up, that there is gun crime in the U.K. I certainly dont live in a crime free country and I'm not saying we value life more, that would be a condescending statement to make. My point was to try to change the mentality that promotes guns as the answer to fighting crime and that the only way to tackle it is to get a bigger gun than the next man. Maybe we grew up with a completely opposing experience of guns, but I was hoping that you could see that some societies can and do function without "the right to bear arms" as a fundamental requirement of a citizens rights. I wasn'nt lashing out at all. You seem to be defensive and decided to make a point by misunderstanding what I had said previously and then talking about lollipop land. Its okay though, I like lollipops. 
.... [Edited 1/2/07 12:53pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Shorty said: JustErin said: The better question is, why do people have guns in the first place, especially a 16 year old?
Fucked up. to hunt, to target shoot, to defend one's self, because they have every damn right too. It's the smile that unnerves me. Why smile? What's to smile about following that word selection? I'm not picking on you, I'm just asking questions. Hunting's not funny to anyone except morons, although i have heard some hunting jokes (oddly enough, rarely involving animals). Target shooting can hardly be a mirthful pasttime. I've never heard any jokes about target shooting. And defending oneself. Well, I guess an equivilative pre-emptive strike is praying to an invisible spaghetti monster in the sky in the hope of winning a free pass into a heavenly eternity where all your dead relatives and loved ones are cartwheeling around merrily eating mashed potatoes. In other words, let's do it, just in case. It not only excaserbates the original issue but fights fire with fire making....wooooo.....AN EVEN BIGGER FIRE!! [Edited 1/2/07 13:02pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm a responsible gun owner.
Every New Year's, instead of shooting it, I just butt people on the head with the handle. "Make concussions, not death", that's my motto. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Number23 said: Shorty said: to hunt, to target shoot, to defend one's self, because they have every damn right too. It's the smile that unnerves me. Why smile? What's to smile about following that word selection? I'm not picking on you, I'm just asking questions. Hunting's not funny to anyone except morons, although i have heard some hunting jokes (oddly enough, rarely involving animals). Target shooting can hardly be a mirthful pasttime. I've never heard any jokes about target shooting. And defending oneself. Well, I guess an equivilative pre-emptive strike is praying to an invisible spaghetti monster in the sky in the hope of winning a free pass into a heavenly eternity where all your dead relatives and loved ones are cartwheeling around merrily eating mashed potatoes. In other words, let's do it, just in case. It not only excaserbates the original issue but fights fire with fire making....wooooo.....AN EVEN BIGGER FIRE!! [Edited 1/2/07 13:02pm] It's not particularly funny, but target shooting is fun to some. [Edited 1/2/07 13:13pm] Wanna hear me sing? www.ChampagneHoneybee.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
UCantHavaDaMango said: Number23 said: It's the smile that unnerves me. Why smile? What's to smile about following that word selection? I'm not picking on you, I'm just asking questions. Hunting's not funny to anyone except morons, although i have heard some hunting jokes (oddly enough, rarely involving animals). Target shooting can hardly be a mirthful pasttime. I've never heard any jokes about target shooting. And defending oneself. Well, I guess an equivilative pre-emptive strike is praying to an invisible spaghetti monster in the sky in the hope of winning a free pass into a heavenly eternity where all your dead relatives and loved ones are cartwheeling around merrily eating mashed potatoes. In other words, let's do it, just in case. It not only excaserbates the original issue but fights fire with fire making....wooooo.....AN EVEN BIGGER FIRE!! [Edited 1/2/07 13:02pm] It's not particularly funny, but it is fun to some. Do you pray to Yahweh? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LleeLlee said: Shorty said: actually...what you said was "How about valuing life? And not placing people in the position where taking a life is so easy." which I'm sorry....left me to assume (and yes I know what assuming does) that you were implying that the UK has no need for guns in the home cause you guys value life....when in fact we all do value life (as stable law abiding people) but unfortunately that does not change the fact that there IS indeed violent crime that we must sometimes protect ourselves from. The fact I was trying to point out was that despite the fairly recent strict gun laws put in place in the UK....still the gun crimes rise. No need to lash out at me....I'm only have a conversation with you. I'm sorry you make assumptions that you shouldn't make. I said earlier, if you scroll up, that there is gun crime in the U.K. I certainly dont live in a crime free country and I'm not saying we value life more, that would be a condescending statement to make. My point was to try to change the mentality that promotes guns as the answer to fighting crime and that the only way to tackle it is to get a bigger gun than the next man. Maybe we grew up with a completely opposing experience of guns, but I was hoping that you could see that some societies can and do function without "the right to bear arms" as a fundamental requirement of a citizens rights. I wasn'nt lashing out at all. You seem to be defensive and decided to make a point by misunderstanding what I had said previously and then talking about lollipop land. Its okay though, I like lollipops.
.... [Edited 1/2/07 12:53pm] Forgive me. I took your original question "How do people in countries where there are no guns in the home, protect themselves and their children?" as a literal one. I don't feel I was being defensive at all, and I didn't decide to misuderstand you....I simply just misunderstood you. My lollipop land comment was not meant to upset you...I was really just agreeing with you that in an ideal world there would be no need but unfortunately this is not an ideal world and I do not believe laws will ever make it so. "not a fan" yeah...ok | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Number23 said: UCantHavaDaMango said: It's not particularly funny, but it is fun to some. Do you pray to Yahweh? What does that have to do with target shooting? Wanna hear me sing? www.ChampagneHoneybee.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
UCantHavaDaMango said: Number23 said: Do you pray to Yahweh? What does that have to do with target shooting? Do you find burkas sexy? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Number23 said: Shorty said: to hunt, to target shoot, to defend one's self, because they have every damn right too. It's the smile that unnerves me. Why smile? What's to smile about following that word selection? I'm not picking on you, I'm just asking questions. Hunting's not funny to anyone except morons, although i have heard some hunting jokes (oddly enough, rarely involving animals). Target shooting can hardly be a mirthful pasttime. I've never heard any jokes about target shooting. And defending oneself. Well, I guess an equivilative pre-emptive strike is praying to an invisible spaghetti monster in the sky in the hope of winning a free pass into a heavenly eternity where all your dead relatives and loved ones are cartwheeling around merrily eating mashed potatoes. In other words, let's do it, just in case. It not only excaserbates the original issue but fights fire with fire making....wooooo.....AN EVEN BIGGER FIRE!! [Edited 1/2/07 13:02pm]
cause I knew it was a statement that was controversial and the smile was more like a "I know I"m gonna get it for this" kinda smile.
and I like to unnerve you. as for your comments about hunting, and target shooting I never said any of that was "funny" so not sure what you're going on about there. [Edited 1/2/07 13:30pm] "not a fan" yeah...ok | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Shorty said: LleeLlee said: I'm sorry you make assumptions that you shouldn't make. I said earlier, if you scroll up, that there is gun crime in the U.K. I certainly dont live in a crime free country and I'm not saying we value life more, that would be a condescending statement to make. My point was to try to change the mentality that promotes guns as the answer to fighting crime and that the only way to tackle it is to get a bigger gun than the next man. Maybe we grew up with a completely opposing experience of guns, but I was hoping that you could see that some societies can and do function without "the right to bear arms" as a fundamental requirement of a citizens rights. I wasn'nt lashing out at all. You seem to be defensive and decided to make a point by misunderstanding what I had said previously and then talking about lollipop land. Its okay though, I like lollipops.
.... [Edited 1/2/07 12:53pm] Forgive me. I took your original question "How do people in countries where there are no guns in the home, protect themselves and their children?" as a literal one. I don't feel I was being defensive at all, and I didn't decide to misuderstand you....I simply just misunderstood you. My lollipop land comment was not meant to upset you...I was really just agreeing with you that in an ideal world there would be no need but unfortunately this is not an ideal world and I do not believe laws will ever make it so. I'm glad we could get our differing points of view across. Thank you for the apology shorty! And sorry for any misunderstanding on my part. .... [Edited 1/2/07 16:29pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm very glad I live in Canada.
It's certainly not immune to gun violence but it sure as hell isn't anything like the US. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: I'm very glad I live in Canada.
It's certainly not immune to gun violence but it sure as hell isn't anything like the US. ...and you have more guns per person than we do (according to Moore). By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: Graycap23 said: That SOUNDS great until u are confronted with a CRIMINAL. Then what? 
BTW, it's illegal to carry a firearm/handgun on you in Illinois so I'd be a criminal for carrying one. I do not own a gun, I wll never own a gun. If need be, I'll lock my house up like Ft. Knox but I will never shoot anyone. There's deer and fowl hunting in Illinois (which is where I 'm originally from). So it's OK to carry a gun for hunting purposes with a permit/ license. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Illustrator said: I'm a responsible gun owner.
Every New Year's, instead of shooting it, I just butt people on the head with the handle. "Make concussions, not death", that's my motto.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
xplnyrslf said: Stymie said: Then the criminal gets what he wants, I guess.
BTW, it's illegal to carry a firearm/handgun on you in Illinois so I'd be a criminal for carrying one. I do not own a gun, I wll never own a gun. If need be, I'll lock my house up like Ft. Knox but I will never shoot anyone. There's deer and fowl hunting in Illinois (which is where I 'm originally from). So it's OK to carry a gun for hunting purposes with a permit/ license. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
All I wanna say to this subject is:
I'm glad we're not allowed guns in Holland, cause if we had, our neighbor would be one dead son of a bitch (shooting fireworks all day and night right in front of my door   ) | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I don't think anyone should be able to shoot guns in the air on NY's. Chances are, the individuals are drinking and alcohol and guns don't mix.
Have an instructor's permit and CWP which I don't use. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Stymie said: I think guns should be outlawed.
 we do perfectly well without them  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Whateva said: All I wanna say to this subject is:
I'm glad we're not allowed guns in Holland, cause if we had, our neighbor would be one dead son of a bitch (shooting fireworks all day and night right in front of my door )And I am very happy that they are not allowed here in Austria either With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Serious said: Whateva said: All I wanna say to this subject is:
I'm glad we're not allowed guns in Holland, cause if we had, our neighbor would be one dead son of a bitch (shooting fireworks all day and night right in front of my door )And I am very happy that they are not allowed here in Austria either I don't think they're allowed anywhere in Europe are they?? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |