View Full Version : Gun Crime
G0MZS
10-04-2003, 08:02 PM
The TV is reporting a Gun crime wave in the UK. Gun crime is out of control!!
Three shootings this week five people involved two died. One was a woman who was shot dead in her jewlers. The others crooks sorting things out.
Do you think we have a gun crime wave? I know we are a small Island but take it as a big city.
G0MZS
10-04-2003, 08:18 PM
Our Police have alittle more than what you think. A knife can be pulled and kill faster than a gun that why the Police in America are warned about British tourists. Mre likley to use a knife, toe to toe fighting is a culture as well. Street fighting you call it.
KG4ZLB
10-04-2003, 08:23 PM
After Dunblaine (think Columbine), Comrade Tony and his pink chums in Government, did the typical knee-jerk reaction and banned all legally owned firearms - the consequence of which that gun related crimes went up significantly. There are plenty of pubs in the East End where for £50, no questions asked, you can get a gun with the serial number removed, job done? throw it in the Thames! Guns are a fact of life everywhere; except in the UK the Police are not allowed to fight fire with fire!
KG4ZLB
10-04-2003, 08:44 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
G0MZS
10-04-2003, 08:49 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC9ECI @ Oct. 04 2003,13:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">First guns, then CW, what will they take from you next?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
What you havent got you dont miss. Never had a gun, never needed one. I have always felt safe. My XYL can walk anywhere in our city anytime on her own and get back safe. Dont even know if anyone has been shot and killed in our city. Not in the last 20 years anyway. What about your neck of the woods? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
How many died from gun shot tonight in NY CA FL?
k4dje
10-04-2003, 08:54 PM
This is PROOF that taking guns away from law abiding people does nothing to stop gun crime. It actually increases it. Now the criminals know when they enter your home, to rape rob and pillage, they will find no adequately armed defense. Take a knife to a gun fight and the gun wins.
K9STH
10-04-2003, 08:55 PM
Let's see, Northern Ireland is a part of the U.K.
Enough said!
Glen, K9STH
K6UEY
10-04-2003, 09:02 PM
Only 3 shootings in a week,our typical Grammer schools have more than that, and if you count the High schools the number gets quite high,the cororner had to buy special trucks ,just to be able to pick up all the bodies.
The talk is you can get shot just for refusing to learn code ....... #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
It's very simple. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. The criminals know there probably will not be any return fire. Easy picking for the bad guys, when the good guys can't shoot back. This is happening everywhere guns are banned.
73 W3NAP (packing)
G0MZS
10-04-2003, 09:24 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K9STH @ Oct. 04 2003,13:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let's see, Northern Ireland is a part of the U.K.
Enough said!
Glen, K9STH[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Yes killings got bad but this was terrorists and not street crime. I would also like to point out that the majority of cash that funded the killigs came from America. Yes a terrorist oragnization funded by Americans. Ironic.
Yes Enough said.
ai4ep
10-04-2003, 09:29 PM
aint no one gonna say " guns dont kill people, people kill people " #or some other old saying like that ? #Also some one needs to mention about car wrecks killing people, along with food not cooked right, wives killing their hubby for not taking out the trash,( " shucks yes Betty, I took out the trash the night before last, I went out cheating with your cousin #Ann" ) # No one fights at the bar any more, they stalk each other to ( location ) and shoot each other 3 weeks later. We dont have " post-office" killings any more, and very few " work related " situations, since some #folks have NO job to go to work at. So crime should be DOWN in the good old USA, plus we are running out of folks to shoot AT.
G0MZS
10-04-2003, 09:34 PM
Humans, passion and guns dont mix, oh lets not forget the mental instability equation!
K6UEY
10-04-2003, 09:45 PM
GØMZS,
Lets leave the Ham newbies out of this ...... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 04 2003,14:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Humans, passion and guns dont mix, oh lets not forget the mental instability equation![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Well, who's going to stop a passionate mentally instable person from getting an illegal gun.
Outlaws will have guns, legal or not. They are more reluctant to use them if they knew the victim could possibly have something waiting for them.
Let's say for instance, some whacko walks into a movie theater and decides to shoot up the place because he and his X-wife met there. He kills 15 people.
Now, if there was just one armed citizen in that theater, many precious lives would have been saved. Sure, some would have died, but the number would be less.
I will not be a sitting duck.
73 W3NAP
K9STH
10-04-2003, 10:02 PM
I don't know what a killigs is!
However, I doubt very much that the majority of the IRA funding comes from the United States. Some, yes, but there are all sorts of terrorist organizations that have funded other terrorist organizations.
Also, although the IRA is a definite factor, the other side is definitely not "lilly white" ("orangemen", etc.).
Frankly, the two books that have caused the greatest suffering around the world are the Holy Bible and the Koran! The interpretation of these have caused many problems since at least the "middle ages" if not before. And, they are not going to cease causing problems any time soon!
Glen, K9STH
ae4fa
10-04-2003, 10:13 PM
I reside on a property that covers the equivalent of quite a few city blocks. I have fences, gates, and guns.
The fences deter the average joe. The dogs deter the casual criminal - and let me know when something's amiss. I take care of whoever passes the first two obsticles. So far a warning shot has been the most extreme measure needed.
My guns are loaded and ready - and secure from children. Every adult here knows how to use them, with varying degrees of proficiency.
Another factor you may want to calculate into your comparison, by the way - density of police officers compared to population. Ours is very small, I suspect, compared to yours.
Betcha didn't know which country was the first to enact gun control.
Germany - in the 1930s - under Adolph Hitler.
W5HTW
10-04-2003, 10:19 PM
Keys don't send code; people do!
Ed
Glen, I will modify your statement just a bit. I think the two things that have caused the most suffering over the longest period of time are Religion, and Sex. Both are supposed to be good, but seldom are. I avoid both. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
Tom K8ERV
K3STX
10-05-2003, 01:19 AM
MZS,
Getting to your point, I hope it is not an epidemic, you people are sensible enough over there to make it almost impossible to get a gun.
And PLEASE don't think all American's think like most of the posters here. I, and millions of people who see gun-crime as a problem, think guns are horrible things, I know criminals should not have them, I personally think AE4FA shouldn't have them and wouldn't want them. I have a close relative who was murdered with a pistol and another whose kid picked his "locked" gun cabinet, got the shotgun, and blow his head off. Any my sister came home late one night with the "girls" and her pissed-off idiot husband took a shot at HER! Hey, but the gun was legal.
There is nothing funny about guns and murder, guys. It's pretty serious stuff. As a society I think the UK is doing the right thing; if guns are hard to get, they are hard to get. Not impossible, but harder than going into The Sports Authority. You know, criminals don't grow up being criminals.
But I thought this was a radio forum?
paul
KD7WHQ
10-05-2003, 01:56 AM
Both the UK and Australia are proof that if you take the legally owned guns, which are used in less than 10% of crimes involving firearms, you will still be left with that better than 90%.
And, STH had it right, but 1930's Germany wasn't the first, nor the last. Crime isn't the only reason the population should be kept armed.
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership recently released a video titled "Innocents Betrayed." It pairs with the book "Death by Gun Control" by Aaron Zelmar and Richard W. Stevens. Check the site (www.jpfo.org) for more information.
I am a member of the JPFO the NRA, and Co-Adminstrate the Mauser Shooting Association. I also hold a C&R FFL.
And, my elected official's underlings nearly know me by name.
To quote Charleton Heston, "From my cold dead hands!"
73
ke4pjw
10-05-2003, 02:26 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K3STX @ Oct. 03 2003,19:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You know, criminals don't grow up being criminals.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You show me a murderer and I will show you someone that started with a criminal past as a juvenile, most of the time.
We used to take violent and/or crazy people out of the general population. We don't do that anymore. The crazy people are allowed to roam freely and the violent people are not dealt with properly until they do something that goes beyond your average murder for drugs/money.
As to "Gun Crime", it all depends on what you mean. I believe that there should be some type of extra jail time for the commision of a crime with a firearm. For example, you or someone you are with commits murder while you are committing a crime, you should be put to death. We don't need someone like that breathing our air.
However, if by gun crime you mean someone defending their life, limb or property (personal or otherwise), that is not a crime. There is a difference between murder and killing.
If too many people are getting killed by armed criminals, the best solution is to arm ordinary,sane,noncriminal citizens.
An armed society is a polite society.
ae4fa
10-05-2003, 02:53 AM
Let's see . . .
We banned booze (prohibition era) 'cuz it might hurt people. Yeah, that worked just great . . .
We banned drugs 'cuz they hurt people. Nope, nobody around here has any problem with drugs . . .
Now we wanna ban guns 'cuz they might hurt people. Yup, pretty sure this is goona go just fine . . .
Okay, let's get real. Who's got the stuff that's banned?
Oh, sure. It'll be different this time . . .
k4dje
10-05-2003, 03:26 AM
We all know what the U.K. thinks of self-defense...
Just ask Tony Martin, jailed for defending his home, and now has to pay restitution to the intruders.
His house was burglarized several times, more than 30 over the years. The police have refused to do much more than take a report.
Homeowners have been getting killed by intruders.
He heard glass breaking and footsteps of people in his house. He went downstairs to investigate and was confronted by a burglar. Fearing for his life he fired with his shotgun killing one of the intruders.
The burglars were known to police. They had been charged with more than 100 crimes over the years.
However, it was Mr. Martin who was given a life sentence.
It has since been reduced. He did serve three years before being paroled.
Fred Barras, who was killed in the burglary, had been previously convicted of 29 crimes.
Brendon Fearon, his accomplice, had been convicted of 34 prior crimes.
The Crown allowed him to put conditions on Mr. Martin’s parole and gave him 5000 pounds, in legal aid, to sue Tony Martin for emotional stress.
This happened in Aug 1999.
I believe (could be wrong on this) that even shotguns are now illegal.
AE6IP
10-05-2003, 05:18 AM
Sigh, here we go again; the old gun debate. Personally, I prefer code/no-code, because the only thing that gets bruised there is egos.
About Northern Ireland: No party, including the British army is free of guilt in that sad fiasco, and unless you've studied the facts on the ground, you're not likely to have an accurate picture of what's going on there.
Hell, half the time Jerry Adams doesn't know what's going on, how can we? (The 'orange' equivalent of Sinn Fein is the Ulster Domcratic Party, and their equivalent of the IRA -- and just as bad -- is the Ulster Defense Force, by the way.)
I have no truck with the 'protection from bad guys' argument, because, you know what, the bad guys just go buy bigger cannons and the only thing an arms race gets you is dead. Meanwhile, I've been shot at twice, and had to take guns away from three different people when I wasn't armed. Frankly, I think most of the "pro-gun" people in the U.S. were traumatized by Bambi and the NRA is their way of getting back at those evil deer.
I, for one, sure sleep more soundly, knowing that my alcoholic neighbor keeps an uzi under his pillow and is going to come out on his back porch one day in the midst of TDs and shoot up the neighborhood.
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 05:34 AM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif ...any famous one-liners ?
KD7WHQ
10-05-2003, 05:58 AM
Hang on.. Tomorrow I'll be back with some truly good ones, straight out of history.
And you tell me what happened as a result of their coming to pass.
In this country, it isn't about saving any lives. Wasn't in the UK or Australia either, for that matter.
The UN has an agenda, and as long as any population is armed they can't pull it off. And we bought in on the UN a long time ago.
Every session, they attempt to "legislate" guns out of private ownership. This can be had in black and white, by the way, I am not with the black helicopter crowd.
If it wasn't for this country's representatives telling them no, it would have already come to pass...all but alone in the effort, I'll add.
New World Order? Not interested. I'll keep the constitution with it's bill of rights, thank you.
Consider: "A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
This ONE statement protects the entirety of the rest. If it is gone, the rest will not be far behind.
In paraphrase, "Disarm the people, and you control them."
There's your first one liner, penned by someone in the Nazi party c. 1938..
I refuse to particpate in the creation of victims through disarmament.
The police are not required to protect you (Supreme Court ruling, citation available).
Still comfortable?
Oh, and I left out the fact that I handload too. Shot a 75/100 at 100yds in this last shoot.
Still working the load up, and I need to get to the range more (in the backyard, with Weyrhauser land behind). Mauser didn't put a very deep V in the rear sight, which makes it a challenge.
That's with an 8mm Mauser with open sights on an 8" target.
The Mosin-Nagant, I still need to work with..
Glad to hear all the pro-second amendment posts here.
I'm a life NRA member, have the Arizona CCW, carry a Smith and Wesson 9mm, and support the constitution and our right to bear arms.
JPFO is right about the consequences of being disarmed.
I like the UK in general, but the disarming of their people is a sad disgrace. The fact that Tony Martin went to jail for self-defense is insane.
wb0wao
10-05-2003, 07:09 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7WHQ @ Oct. 04 2003,22:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh, and I left out the fact that I handload too. #Shot a 75/100 at 100yds in this last shoot.
Still working the load up, and I need to get to the range more (in the backyard, with Weyrhauser land behind). #Mauser didn't put a very deep V in the rear sight, which makes it a challenge.
That's with an 8mm Mauser with open sights on an 8" target.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
WHQ -
# Jacketed or cast? #I take it you have slugged the bore already? #I use to get REAL good results with cast bullets patched with paper. #A bear to do, but it really tightened up the grouping!
73
Dennis - WB0WAO
w8amd
10-05-2003, 07:33 AM
I have used firearms for the best part of half a century now. #I was young enough when I first learned to use #one that my uncles had to help me hold it. (One of those evil handguns. #Gasp! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif ) #Started all my children into target shooting before they reached the age of ten. #
None of the many weapons that have been and still are in my and my families possesion have ever caused injury to anyone except for an occasional sore shoulder after a long day at the range.
A firearm is a tool. #It has no will and thus can be neither evil or good. #The evil or good lies with the person who has possesion of it.
Good point, Larry.
And quite frankly, I find it to be really stupid to focus on the firearms and ignore all of the sick, violent movies that are pumped into our kids heads.
In my opinion, the blame for most of the psycho type mass murders such as Colombine falls squarely on the violence in movies. The kids who did the killing were quoting lines out of Bronson and Eastwood flicks as they popped people off. When killing is made to look cool in movies, and is seen as a good solution to whatever problems occur, it's no wonder that some kids soak that crap up and believe it, especially when the parents didn't spend any time with them and teach them proper respect for firearms and for human life.
WA2ZDY
10-05-2003, 11:12 AM
My three cents:
www.geocities.com/wa2zdy/guns.html
I've seen it all folks. #For 23 years #I've been a correction officer in the NJ state prison system. #Am I an expert on criminals? #Yeah, I kinda think so. #And the above link goes to MY personal opinion, much of which is based on those 23 years of interaction with some of the NJ society's very worst convicts.
I will not change your opinion. #But I request that you see all sides of the issue before you go further. #Keep in mind also, if you believe everything you see on TV or read in the newspaper, you really don't know if they're telling you the truth anymore either.
Guns and crime make a very emotional soup. #I'll use the Kennedy family as an example. #Can anyone blame them for being rabid anti-gun crusaders? #No. #Having had two brothers murdered at the hands of gunmen, it's obvious why they feel as they do.
But here's what you probably don't think of. #They have LOTS of armed security. #Trust me on that. #Remember when Ted Kennedy's bodyguard got arrested in DC some years ago carrying illegal weapons? #Hmmmm . . . funny how that works for the rich and famous loudmouths, huh? (Does it seem like many of them feel the "rules" don't apply to them?)
Another point is this. #Lots of the Hollywood folks are against private gun ownership. #They speak loud and clear about it from their very public soapboxes. #And that's their right. #But they can afford to live in exclusive areas that are generally going to be crime-free. #Gated communities with ARMED security on the perimeter. #Armed bodyguards driving bulletproof limosines if they so choose (and many of them do.)
So as you read/hear the hyperbole from those folks, remember, they're not living in the same world most of us are in. #It's easy for them to be uppity. #It's not so easy for some of us.
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 11:52 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k4dje @ Oct. 04 2003,20:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We all know what the U.K. thinks of self-defense...
Just ask Tony Martin, jailed for defending his home, and now has to pay restitution to the intruders.
His house was burglarized several times, more than 30 over the years. The police have refused to do much more than take a report.
Homeowners have been getting killed by intruders.
He heard glass breaking and footsteps of people in his house. He went downstairs to investigate and was confronted by a burglar. Fearing for his life he fired with his shotgun killing one of the intruders.
The burglars were known to police. They had been charged with more than 100 crimes over the years.
However, it was Mr. Martin who was given a life sentence.
It has since been reduced. He did serve three years before being paroled.
Fred Barras, who was killed in the burglary, had been previously convicted of 29 crimes.
Brendon Fearon, his accomplice, had been convicted of 34 prior crimes.
The Crown allowed him to put conditions on Mr. Martin’s parole and gave him 5000 pounds, in legal aid, to sue Tony Martin for emotional stress.
This happened in Aug 1999.
I believe (could be wrong on this) that even shotguns are now illegal.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Sorry but you are totaly wrong on everything from the start to the finish. Tony Martin shot dead a 16 year old crook in the back and the other in the leg. He left the young crook to die overnight on the floor. Both where on the run, in other words deterred. The man lived in a derelict house that was full of rubbish and half demolished. This property attracted kids from all over, the haunted house factor. Yes they did have convctions but when shot they had nothing other than the clothes they stood up in, no guns knife or any weapon.
You should have the right to defend your house and family but that does not mean shoot them in the back while on the run and when you do shoot them leave them to die overnight. Two wrongs do not make a right!
Shot guns hunting rifles etc are legal in the UK it is hand guns and automatics that are illegal and unless you have a valid reason to own one, farmer, game keeper or compertition shooter then you have not got a chance. You even need to be mentaly fit to own one.
I guess I need to add a couple pennies here... A few years ago South Carolina had such a problem with home invasions that the governor passed a law that made it legal for a resident to kill by any means anyone who forces their way into your home... According to the news report I heard, when such an incident happens, the resident will not be arrested or charged with a crime, assuming there is evidence of forced entry...
Not sure if they kept this law on the books as there was much controversy about it, particularly from the police, but the number of home invasions immediately dropped substantially...
For me, I will always keep "old faithful" under the pillow "just in case".....
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 12:23 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W3NAP @ Oct. 04 2003,14:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 04 2003,14:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Humans, passion and guns dont mix, oh lets not forget the mental instability equation![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Well, who's going to stop a passionate mentally instable person from getting an illegal gun.
Outlaws will have guns, legal or not. They are more reluctant to use them if they knew the victim could possibly have something waiting for them.
Let's say for instance, some whacko walks into a movie theater and decides to shoot up the place because he and his X-wife met there. He kills 15 people.
Now, if there was just one armed citizen in that theater, many precious lives would have been saved. Sure, some would have died, but the number would be less.
I will not be a sitting duck.
73 W3NAP[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Gun culture is fuled by guns. The guns that are got hold of are hard to get hold of, it not a matter of walking into a pub in London and you will get one under the table. Most will be from the legal owners who had them stolen instead of selling them back to the govement for a lower price alot went missing. In years to come guns will get even harder to get hold of because the supply is alot slower because most come in on illegal boats etc and not from a shop where almost anyone can go buy on. Our gun culture is kids with there pants on back to front thinking they are from the Bronx rapping and making funny lip noises. Yes American gang land TV culture kicked it off, oh music has a big part to play as well!
The last I was in America I shot many guns at the side of my friends house. AK47, 357 Mag, an old English 303 rifle, pump action shot gun, 9mm Browning (One in every roon in the house and on in the truck) Uzi, Bretta and a 4/10 shot gun! Just to name a few. We went to his local gun store because I asked him if he could take me to one. He was greeted with a large box of rounds and I mean a wooden crate!! What do you need with all this? At first it was quite unerving to see them all. I must say he let us settle in before he got them out to show us and assure us that they was not loaded and the ammo was safe under lock and key. He had only one that was loaded and that was with him 24/7, even in the shower room!!
Maybe if you start to change the gun culture then in many years to come you wont hear on the news of yet another high school kid gone on a killing rampage at school.
As for the IRA, well I wont bite Glen. I will tell you that you are wrong on the funding and do not have to look further than NY who have had openly had marches to raise money not to mention the large fund raising dinners they hold. Where do you think all the arms come from? And thats my lot on that subject as it is now in the PAST.
kd5icr
10-05-2003, 12:58 PM
Gun control is hitting what I shoot at.
As for banning gun.....Get real would it make all you anti-gun people feel better if those that were shot were pushed out of a window8-10 floors up? Or how about getting beat to hell with a ball bat? Or still even better a BIG 8 inch blade sunk to the hilt?
You see crime is crime you will never stop a killer that is flat out to kill no matter who they are out to get.
If GB and other countries ban guns good for them.
This is a reality check.
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 01:34 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd5icr @ Oct. 05 2003,05:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Gun control is hitting what I shoot at.
As for banning gun.....Get real would it make all you anti-gun people feel better if those that were shot were pushed out of a window8-10 floors up? Or how about getting beat to hell with a ball bat? Or still even better a BIG 8 inch blade sunk to the hilt?
You see crime is crime you will never stop a killer that is flat out to kill no matter who they are out to get.
If GB and other countries ban guns good for them.
This is a reality check.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
School-Associated Violent Deaths in the United States, 1994-1999
Mark Anderson, MD, MPH; Joanne Kaufman, PhD; Thomas R. Simon, PhD; Lisa Barrios, DrPH; Len Paulozzi, MD; George Ryan, PhD; Rodney Hammond, PhD; William Modzeleski, MS; Thomas Feucht, PhD; Lloyd Potter, PhD, MPH; and the School-Associated Violent Deaths Study Group
Context Despite the public alarm following a series of high-profile school shootings that occurred in the United States during the late 1990s, little is known about the actual incidence and characteristics of school-associated violent deaths.
Objective To describe recent trends and features of school-associated violent deaths in the United States.
Design, Setting, and Subjects Population-based surveillance study of data collected from media databases, state and local agencies, and police and school officials for July 1, 1994, through June 30, 1999. A case was defined as a homicide, suicide, legal intervention, or unintentional firearm-related death of a student or nonstudent in which the fatal injury occurred (1) on the campus of a public or private elementary or secondary school, (2) while the victim was on the way to or from such a school, or (3) while the victim was attending or traveling to or from an official school-sponsored event.
Main Outcome Measures National estimates of risk of school-associated violent death; national trends in school-associated violent deaths; common features of these events; and potential risk factors for perpetration and victimization.
Results Between 1994 and 1999, 220 events resulting in 253 deaths were identified; 202 events involved 1 death and 18 involved multiple deaths (median, 2 deaths per multiple-victim event). Of the 220 events, 172 were homicides, 30 were suicides, 11 were homicide-suicides, 5 were legal intervention deaths, and 2 were unintentional firearm-related deaths. Students accounted for 172 (68.0%) of these deaths, resulting in an estimated average annual incidence of 0.068 per 100 000 students. Between 1992 and 1999, the rate of single-victim student homicides decreased significantly (P = .03); however, homicide rates for students killed in multiple-victim events increased (P = .047). Most events occurred around the start of the school day, the lunch period, or the end of the school day. For 120 (54.5%) of the incidents, respondents reported that a note, threat, or other action potentially indicating risk for violence occurred prior to the event. Homicide offenders were more likely than homicide victims to have expressed some form of suicidal behavior prior to the event (odds ratio [OR], 6.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96-24.65) and been bullied by their peers (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.12-5.92).
Conclusions Although school-associated violent deaths remain rare events, they have occurred often enough to allow for the detection of patterns and the identification of potential risk factors. This information may help schools respond to this problem.
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 01:37 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fatal Firearm Injuries in the United States, 1962-1994
Violence Surveillance Summary Series, No. 3
Executive Summary
Death due to injuries from firearms is an increasingly important public health problem. As a group, injuries from firearms were the ninth leading cause of death overall in 1994 and the fourth leading cause of years of potential life lost before age 65 (NCIPC, unpublished data). During the 33-year period covered by this report, the total number of firearm deaths increased by 130%, from 16,720 in 1962 to 38,505 in 1994. If present trends continue, firearm-related injuries could become the leading cause of deaths attributed to injury by the year 2003, surpassing injuries due to motor vehicle crashes.
This report reviews the descriptive epidemiology of firearm-related mortality in the United States from 1962-1994. The patterns of overall firearm-related mortality and of homicide, suicide, unintentional death, deaths occurring during legal intervention, and deaths of undetermined intent are examined by race, sex, and age group.
Throughout the 33-year period, suicide and homicide were responsible for most firearm fatalities; they accounted for 94% of the total in 1994. The fluctuations and overall increase in rates of total firearm-related mortality most closely resembled the pattern of firearm-related homicide. Although suicide rates were high and gradually increasing over time, they varied less than homicide rates. The rates for unintentional death from firearms, deaths during legal intervention, and deaths of undetermined intent were low and generally declined over the study period.
Firearm-related mortality affects all demographic groups, but the greatest increases in recent years were among teens 15-19 years of age, young adults aged 20-24, and older adults aged 75 and older. The rates of overall firearm-related mortality for young people aged 15-24 were higher from 1990-1994 than at any other time during the 33-year period. For those 15-19, increases in firearm-related homicide, suicide, and unintentional injury deaths were especially great. The increase in firearm-related homicide in this age group occurred among all race-sex groups. For America's elderly, rates of suicide by firearm were particularly high, and increases occurred in all race-sex groups except black females, for whom the number of suicides were too small to produce stable rates. The surveillance data in this report are intended to familiarize public health practitioners, researchers, and policymakers with the problem of firearm-related deaths in this country. While these data help characterize the magnitude of the problem and identify groups at risk, there are still gaps in our knowledge. Current surveillance efforts need to be expanded to include information about nonfatal injuries. We also need a greater understanding of the causes of firearm deaths to identify modifiable individual and societal risk factors. Finally, further research is required to plan, develop, and evaluate prevention strategies.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Sobering statistics of kids killing each other, most killings between 14/24. I would rather keep the kids get rid of the guns
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 02:02 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC9ECI @ Oct. 05 2003,06:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Perhaps if we replaced TV and video games with a little thing I like to call 'parenting' and introduced a little more religious instruction, we wouldn't even have to worry about kids shooting one another. #First things first, eliminate all the social workers and re-introduce spanking.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Sounds about right. Teach your kids it is ok to beat up on people to put things right. My Children are good kids (So far) they have video games cable TV in there rooms I also let them watch most films and programs. My children do know the differecnce between right and wrong and can tell what is fact and fiction that they watch on TV. Parenting is the key but I can tell my kids off without them blowing my brains out then going to school and doing the same to a few friends.
The gun laws will not change in America but I do hope we do not go down the same road in years to come. I am glad our Police do not work the streets with guns on there hips and it is quiet a shock to see it for the first time when visiting America. Just like England America is a fine country with great values just some madness gets in now and then.
W5HTW
10-05-2003, 02:43 PM
Actually, I never heard of a gun committing a crime.
But then I never heard of a knife committing a crime, either. Or a baseball bat. Or a tire iron.
Never heard of a car driving drunk, either.
Odd. I must be on the wrong planet.
Maybe the title of this posting should have been "crimes committed with guns?" Put the emphasis on the word "crime" as there is no such thing as "gun crime." There is crime, and criminals often use guns to commit it.
Here's a statitic for you. One hundred percent, yep, all, en toto, of folks who use guns to commit crimes, are criminals. But, with US ownership of handguns alone at about 60 million, (last published figures I found) and "gun crimes" (?) at about 230,000, which includes holdups, for example, in which the gun is never even fired, certainly not 100 percent of gun owners are criminals. In fact, not even point one percent. Which doesn't even consider the fact that most criminals commit multiple crimes, so it isn't "one gun, one crime" statistic at all. So the percentage drops markedly lower. And most violent criminals are repeat offenders, so again, the percentage drops. Where do we wind up? Maybe .0005 percent of gun owners use them to commit crimes?
Oh, and we didn't include rifles and shotguns in the ownership figures, did we?
Anyway, I'm pretty sure my guns are not plotting behind my back to commit a crime and make me into a criminal. I feel completely safe.
Ed
Ed
From the original post:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One was a woman who was shot dead in her jewlers.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Might I point out that it is better to be shot in the Jewlers than to be shot in the Jewels. # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
The previous message and break from discussion was brought to as a public service message.
k4dje
10-05-2003, 03:33 PM
If there were armed people in the schools the killings would not have happened. If the teachers were armed they could have stopped the shootings.
When I was a youngster, junior high school age, I had planned to go deer hunting with a friend after school and over the weekend. So with permission from the school I brought my deer rifle with me to school. I rode a school bus; my friend lived on the other side of the county. I gave the gun to the principal when I got to school. When school was over I took it with me to my friend’s house riding his bus. We went hunting over the weekend. I would have reversed this process on Monday but I got a deer on Saturday and was picked up by my Dad. It was nothing to see KIDS walking down the street with guns. None of us ever considered shooting other people.
Could this happen today? NO. Why not?
Tony Martin:
I wouldn't call a 350 acre farm a "shack"
Over the past 5 years 66 homeowners had been killed by burglars.
If someone breaks into my house and shines a flashlight in my eyes he will get shot also.
The parole board called Mr. Martin a danger to burglars at one parole hearing in which he was denied parole.
After burglars had broken into his mother’s home four times, Burt Barber of Northamptonshire put razor wire on top of the 93 year old woman's garden fence. But authorities made him remove it. , calling it a danger to intruders.
In a perfect world I would not have to worry about defending myself or my family from degenerates. The world is not perfect nor will it ever be.
I would rather have a gun and not need it.. Than to need a gun and not have it.
I refuse to be a victim. I am not paranoid; the chances of me needing a gun for defense are pretty slim. However I consider it good insurance.
K3STX
10-05-2003, 03:45 PM
I think this is why they say that in meeting someone for the first time (like in a QSO) avoid politics and religion.
Marty is right, I did not know this was done here before but it IS just like to code/no-code debate. The only difference is that code/no-code is about Ham radio and not about life and death.
Oh yeah, I forgot, guns don't kill. people do. Maybe if the UK gave every citizen who wanted a pistol access to one all gun crime there would end. Here in America, as we see, people love their guns and fortunately we have almost no gun crime here at all. If you look, our death rate per capita due to guns is almost zero.
Oh, and the fact that not one of the pro-gun folks even acknowledged my statement that my relatives were murdered by guns tells ME something, anyway. Oh, that's right, they were killed by a people WITH a gun, they weren't actually killed by the gun itself.
See ya'll on the Questions and Answers forum.
paul
w5alt
10-05-2003, 03:48 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 05 2003,1000)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The gun laws will not change in America but I do hope we do not go down the same road in years to come. I am glad our Police do not work the streets with guns on there hips and it is quiet a shock to see it for the first time when visiting America. Just like England America is a fine country with great values just some madness gets in now and then.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
If you think the US has lots of guns, you should see Latin America. Looking out my window right this moment I can see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 armed guards. And I know inside at least 2 of the restaurants are more. That doesn't count the 3 banks (which are closed right now) or the oil company office (also closed on Sunday), which is just out of sight.
Of course, when there is a crime and they have a shoot out with the police, the pictures are published on the back page of the newspaper - in all their gory detail. Seeing the blood and guts and half a head on what used to be a person seems to be a fairly good deterent for people not to want to make the back page. Things are generally calm and peaceful here, except for the occasional Colombian kidnapping, which is normally done without shooting, since they don't want to risk damaging the goods.
KC0OFZ
10-05-2003, 03:53 PM
Sounds like most anti gun persons feel that it is only a crime to kill someone with a gun. Knives, bats, drunk driving, ect is all OK as long as the person is not killed with a gun. If some one is killed by a gun or a car accident is the gun victem any more dead? If we want to save people lets outlaw cars. Look at all the lives that would be saved. I do not advocate any criminal owning a gun, however a law abiding citizen should be allowed to. The strangest part of the anti-gun debate is all of the blame is focused on a tool, not the person in the wrong, why is that???
WA2ZDY
10-05-2003, 04:32 PM
The system of justice in the UK could be brought up for some serious ridicule.
Jamie Bulger was 2 years old when two lads, aged 11 and 12 years old lured him from his mother in a shopping mall. They dragged him, crying hysterically, out of the shop and down to a railroad yard where they beat him to death.
They were released from prison a couple years ago at age 18. The UK system decided that not only had they been rehabilitated in a few short years, but that they deserved new identities at the cost to the taxpaying public so they could get on with life without harrassment and/or retribution for their heinous crime against a TWO YEAR OLD.
Did you know that not all that long ago, criminals were all let out of English prisons for Christmas? Yep. Killers and everything. Of course by some odd quirk, I recall the article saying none had ever failed to return. Is that odd? There's something in the water over there.
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 05:08 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif i WAS going to make a few statements, but I read WHO started this post. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
wa4rqg
10-05-2003, 05:34 PM
Guns donot kill. #People do. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
w0tdh
10-05-2003, 06:18 PM
Seems the Author has clearly stated his opinion and will not be deterred by any comments I make here.........
Passion rules many stituations, but training and clear headed thinking should take over in a stress situation.
That training was provided by Uncle Sam. It was called "Basic Training".
Respect for others was part of that training. So was learning the use and care of firearms. Most able bodied young folks were required to partake of this training. Not so though for the past three or four decades.
We are now suffering as a Nation, the results of no mandatory DRAFT.
Respect for others, yourself as well as firearms is very much lacking in our youth of today.
I blame Congress. They let the whiners of America lead them to passing that legislation.
Yes I am a member of the National Rifle Association and was during my entire career in the police department.
I very much know that a well armed well trained population will not only reduce crime, but help deter it.
Many of our youthful offenders of today, in my opinion, would never have been involved in crime nor have been arrested had they been in the Armed Forces.
Many Congressmen today laud the programs that are ongoing that provide a "Boot Camp" for youthful offenders. Always taking credit and applauding the near miracle good results. What irony.
We had thousands of folks being discharged from the Armed Services each year that had been DRAFTED. They were a pool of folks to be called upon in case of War. As most were in the Reserves for a few years. These folks had families and taught their children respect for firearms. NOT to be afraid of them. Fear of firearms is for the most part a lack of knowledge/training in firearms.
Congress's most serious mistake in my life time was getting rid of the Draft.
They also, along with the Supreme Court, eliminated Prayer in Schools and Public places.
It was already gone from the Home by that time because of the end results of the National Debt. How so? When the DEBT reached a point, beyond all normal folk's imagination, it reduced the purchasing power of each and every one of us. Each Dollar became worth perhaps a quarter in buying power. The second pertinant party of the family went to work to regain a part of the standard of living they once had. Even if the wife made dollar for dollar that her husband did, they only regained half of their living standard. The Dollar purchasing power had been cut in half .....twice. #
Who is taking care of the children.....? #Grand Pa and Grand Ma to begin with. #Now it is the least expensive baby sitter, MTV, or best yet.....the STREET.
Three things need to be reversed for this Country to begin to recover;
Pay off the DEBT.
Reinstate Prayer in Public places
Reinstate the Draft.
Tom - K0PJG
Real Radios "GLOW" in the Dark
P.S.
A .22, 410 es a 12 ga were always in the hall closet. I was taught to respect them as I was taught to respect others.
N0WVA
10-05-2003, 06:23 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HR10 @ Oct. 05 2003,00:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have used firearms for the best part of half a century now. #I was young enough when I first learned to use #one that my uncles had to help me hold it. (One of those evil handguns. #Gasp! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif ) #Started all my children into target shooting before they reached the age of ten. #
None of the many weapons that have been and still are in my and my families possesion have ever caused injury to anyone except for an occasional sore shoulder after a long day at the range.
A firearm is a tool. #It has no will and thus can be neither evil or good. #The evil or good lies with the person who has possesion of it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
When I was growing up there was a gun in every corner of the house. All the ammo was kept locked up. Guess what, I never even touched one of them. I was told Id have my ass beat cherry red if I ever got caught messing around with them. Then when I was about 12 my dad took me out and showed me how to use them. I really think its sad when parents cant admit to their own screw-ups when it comes to properly raising their kids, then blame it on some inanimate object. If you raise little monsters, thats what your gonna get.
The thought of shooting someone should never even entered the childs head. Why dont we focus the attention on why the person is thinking this, and not the symptoms? As always though, you are gonna have a case or two where something unexplainable happens. Then the wussies start whining about guns cause they dont feel "safe". I feel safer with my neighbors owning guns, than without. If you cant trust your neighbor with a gun, then you need to be more worried about getting out of where you live than banning guns.
I like to hunt whitetail. I like the taste of the meat. Why should I have this taken away from me when I am a responsible citizen?
Thats like saying if a person is out boating and drinking, and kills a swimmer, that we need to outlaw boats. How stupid and perposterous.
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 06:47 PM
No guns do not kill but the law that allows a killer to own a gun is the killer. Guns are for killing so why do you need one in the home? You dont!
N0WVA
10-05-2003, 06:52 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 05 2003,11:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No guns do not kill but the law that allows a killer to own a gun is the killer. Guns are for killing so why do you need one in the home? You dont![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Tell that to your wife and little girl after some nut has broken in to your house and raped them.
G0MZS
10-05-2003, 06:54 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0WVA @ Oct. 05 2003,11:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 05 2003,11:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No guns do not kill but the law that allows a killer to own a gun is the killer. Guns are for killing so why do you need one in the home? You dont![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Tell that to your wife and little girl after some nut has broken in to your house and raped them.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Odds are it wont. Not in England anyway, we have not got that bad yet. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
The 'GUN CONTROL' arguements never cease to amaze me!
It is always focused on the INANIMTE object as the root cause of the problem - NEVER the USER of the object! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
The facts and truths are simple..
1) A weapon CANNOT THINK therefore---
2) A weapon CANNOT take any action therefore--
3) A weapon CANNOTe the root cause of the problem!
Yet folks treat IT as the root cause and pass rules and assess penalities which focus on the inanimate object, not the user of the object with little regard to REALITY.
1) A person CAN THINK therefore--
2) A person CAN take action therefore---
3) A persno CAN be the root cause of the problem!
YET folks spend more time trying to correct the problem by dealing with the INANIMATE object INSTEAD of dealing with the USER of the object.
If you disagree with the preceeding, then by sheer logic one MUST also begin the process of attaching EQUAL treatment to ALL inanimate objects that are the source of the same amount, level, and depthof hurt, death, and destruction.
Then.. I expect you should start imposing restrictions on cars, knives, hammers, bats, etc.
As a personal note..
if YOU break into my home.. and I *THINK* my life is in danger (or that of my family) then you better know I'll use that weapon to cause you great distress. I don't care if you are coming INTO the house or RUNNING to get OUT of the house.
YOU ARE IN MY house and you don't belong there. Doesn't matter HOW you got there. #Doesn't matter if you are coming or going. You put me in fear for my life.. YOU are gonna be the recipient of whatever means I can muster to render you incapable of doing whatever it was you had on your mind AS IT IS PRESENTED TO ME AT THAT MOMENT. Don't tell me 'well I wasn't planning on doing xx or yy to you!' I don't know that. All I know is YOU are where you don't belong and it has raised my fear for safety of life to the point where I need to take action to mitigate that problem.
Your presence is a headache that I don't need. I have a perfect remedy for REALLY bad two-legged headaches.
Take an asprin.. somewhere between .22 and .44 inches in size. Apply it to the temple of the one causing the headache with suitable force - say, oh...somewhere between 1000 and 3000 feet per second.
Trust me.. GUARANTEED TO CURE ANY TWO LEGGED HEADACHE that I know of. And nicest thing.. THE HEADACHE NEVER RETURNS to bother anyone else!
There are several good asprin manufacturers out there.
"I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by six!"
As to it not being 'bad' in England.. Think back to just a few years ago.. drift your memory back in time.. to the mid 1900's.. Think about some of your neighbors.. Czechoslovakia, Poland to name a couple. Gee! Wonder HOW the populace was so EASILY made serfs and slaves of the Russians?
When good people are disarmed..then evil will open its hands and let out those who will do Evil's bidding. Then, like it was in WW2..you'll be screaming for help.. exceptTHIS time. help won't be there becuase your attitude will have driven others to disarm and that lessens the chance for you to have help?
Think that is farfetched? Just go back to Germany when a certain little clerk with a 'weird mustache' decided to start his rise to power.
"Those who FORGET history are doomed to repeat it."
as for guns being only for killing... umm.. gee.
Then by EXTENSION.. to G0MZS ..
ALL THOSE WHO HUNT GAME ARE KILLERS!
All those who use guns to take care of criminals and those who do bad and can only be stopped by such means are KILLERS! (Try telling a COP that he is a killer when he's just stopped some two legged headache from killing his wife!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
All those who use guns in the military are KILLERS. (You made no distinction for the military in your messages)
All those who possess a firearm for self protection are KILLERS. Might I remind you that here in the USA (And other places around the world, that there are NUMEROUS examples where the MERE sight of a weapon was enough to STOP the crime from #happening)
Let us all join hands...
Let us put on our rose-colored glasses..
Let us gently sing..
'Kumbaya' together while we contemplate the dawning of 'The Age Of Aquarius' and await the arrival of Utopia!
and then..let us remember all those 'kind souls' who use those EVIL guns to make it safe for us to do these things..
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 07:03 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif the KEY word in the above post is the last word in the sentence . The word " yet ". http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 07:04 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif guns do not kill people. People kill people. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 07:06 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif When the guns are OUTLAWED, only OUTLAWS will have guns. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 07:09 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ...by the way, aint it about time for another " code / no code " debate ? This time, get organized so that party A says this, party B says that, party C agrees with A, along comes party D that dont agree with either side, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
KC8UGM
10-05-2003, 07:25 PM
You guys forgot this one .Ted Kennedy's car killed more people than my GUN.
They can have mine when they pry my cold dead fingers off it.
73
AMG.. I just thought of a way to combine the two..
Pick representatives from each camp and have a good old fashioned duel. The twist?
The person counting the number of paces would do so using CW to indicate the step number and would send it at the speed of at least 5 WPM. When then end of the steps arrived and then the command to TURN comes, it would sent using the operating signal for ONLY the DESIRED STATION TO GO AHEAD AND ALL OTHERS MUST STAYOUT!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I know.. it would result inthe no-code side being decimated.. but at least you would have a resolution and could get on with other important things!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
AB9HR
10-05-2003, 07:29 PM
This is my rifle, this is my gun. This is for killing, this is for fun.
AB9HR
10-05-2003, 07:30 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd4amg @ Oct. 05 2003,12:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif guns do not kill people. People kill people. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I'm pretty sure the bullet does most of the killing. Well, I'm sure if you hit someone over the head with a gun hard enough, it will kill..
ai4ep
10-05-2003, 07:38 PM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif good idea on paper... but it will only work with GENERAL or EXTRA class ops who LNOW c w...how about if it were at least one " no - code tech " ? .then how do you do it ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif .....also make the contest a lot easier...the one that listens but does NOT transmit the longest period of time wins. It dont matter what band ( hf, vhf, uhf ) the first one to transmit ( in any mode ) loses. ...here is the clincher: microphone is duck-taped to their good hand. first time you clench your fist you key up ...oops http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif ...or ... a j-38 cw key is ( somehow ) stuck with the key between your teeth, your teeth keep in a closed position, the first to OPEN their mouth opens the key and loses !!...more ideas ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
ei5ja
10-05-2003, 11:03 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K9STH @ Oct. 04 2003,13:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let's see, Northern Ireland is a part of the U.K.
Enough said!
Glen, K9STH[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Cheap shot Glen.
Northern Ireland is an exceptional case where the entire population suffered greatly through the last 30 odd years.
There is, at least, an effort being made to sort it out.
Would that the same political energies were being expended Stateside.
G0MZS is quite right when he says that he and his xyl can walk the street safely as is the case of most cities and towns in the British Isles.
73 Ed
ei5ja
10-05-2003, 11:14 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k4dje @ Oct. 04 2003,20:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just ask Tony Martin, jailed for defending his home, and now has to pay restitution to the intruders.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Get current Dan,
All litigation is ceased in the case. Both agreed not to sue the other and called it quits. No money changed hands (Except through the legal shark's)
And maybe the relative quiet of US sports matches when compared with the after match riots in GB is due to the shape of the ball?
When comparing the safety to "walk the streets" in GB and the US, please don't forget to consider racial makeup, economics, population, and the other factors before blaming this on guns.
You want to make it safe here in the us? #Just make sure the kids are weened off of "cool". #When it is cool to be a nice person and uncool to be a funkball LOSER banger, then the generational benefits will eventually take over. #But "cool" is an enterprise. #Whatever it is changes rapidly so we have to buy something else to try to chase "cool". #Count the commercials on TV where:
1. Someone lies to someone else
2. Women hit men.
3. Parents look like losers.
4. Contain the words "the rules have changed" or "no more rules"
5. Contain the words xyz product " ...revolves around you."
6. Purchase of the product implies you'll be cool, look better to the opposite sex, not look stupid....
Just to name a few. #My guess is that when the effects of the "boomers" die off in a couple of generations, we'll have a chance. In the mean time remember, your parents told you you'd screw up the world....and they were right.
AE6IP
10-06-2003, 01:47 AM
Why is it, I wonder, that all the 2nd amendment boosters never seem to belong to a well regulated militia?
k4dje
10-06-2003, 04:51 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Get current Dan,
All litigation is ceased in the case. Both agreed not to sue the other and called it quits. No money changed hands (Except through the legal shark's[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Good to know, thanks for the update.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why is it, I wonder, that all the 2nd amendment boosters never seem to belong to a well regulated militia?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
In the Federalist papers the militia consists of all able bodied men.
The second amendment was put there to prevent a tyrannical government.
MZS, aren't you the one who's too lazy to learn code, so you want it to be eliminated as a requirement ?
And now, you're too chicken to defend yourself, so you want us all to give up our guns ?
Maybe you get a kick out of stiring up controversy, but all you're really doing is giving us a good laugh...
Too bad your country doesn't trust you enough to allow you to own a firearm...
Isn't it ironic that British forces in Iraq allow a defeated enemy to walk around with AK-47's while prohibiting their own law-abiding citizens from owning small arms ?
Don't like what I have to say ? Tell me where I'm wrong, Jackson, if you can !
G0MZS
10-06-2003, 05:45 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w2fgv @ Oct. 05 2003,21:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">MZS, aren't you the one who's too lazy to learn code, so you want it to be eliminated as a requirement ?
And now, you're too chicken to defend yourself, so you want us all to give up our guns ?
Maybe you get a kick out of stiring up controversy, but all you're really doing is giving us a good laugh...
Too bad your country doesn't trust you enough to allow you to own a firearm...
Isn't it ironic that British forces in Iraq allow a defeated enemy to walk around with AK-47's while prohibiting their own law-abiding citizens from owning small arms ?
Don't like what I have to say ? Tell me where I'm wrong, Jackson, if you can ![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
G0MZS mmmmm too lazy to do code? Think about it. Hi
Looks like most of them AK47s are been used, against the Americans. And by the way i see Iraq is more stable around the British wonder why. Maybe it because they are not killing innocent men women and children, why, because they are proffessionals and not nervous gun touting racoon hunters #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
In your haste to get the fur flying, you made about 8 gramatical errors in 4 sentences...
Like I said, you're giving us all a really good laugh !
k4dje
10-06-2003, 06:04 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like most of them AK47s are been used, against the Americans. How many is it now? And by the way is see Iraq is more stable around the British wonder why. Maybe it because they are not killing innocent men women and children because they are proffessionals and not nervous gun touting racoon hunters [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Are you tongue tied? Why would the Brits not trust its citizens with firearms? HMMMMMMM As far as the raccoon hunting part that is a very enjoyable past time. Great exercise. Nothing like chasing the hounds through the woods at night to keep off the extra pounds. Oh yea we are armed while doing this.
The American military is the most professional of all. We are the greatest in history, not only in our prowess, but also in our compassion.
I would comment on the role of the British, but I am not in Iraq and therefore have no knowledge as to what mission the Crowns forces are doing.
AE6IP
10-06-2003, 06:10 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k4dje @ Oct. 05 2003,21:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why is it, I wonder, that all the 2nd amendment boosters never seem to belong to a well regulated militia?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
In the Federalist papers the militia consists of all able bodied men.
The second amendment was put there to prevent a tyrannical government.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Jefferson writing as president made it clear that the well regulate militia was a tool of each state, under the command of its govenor.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In 1781 in his Notes on the State of Virginia, Query IX, Thomas Jefferson described the militia: "Every able-bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50 is enrolled in the militia. .... In every county is a county lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county. .... The governor is the head of the military, as well as the civil power."[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
It always amuses me that people who cite the 2nd amendment never seem to get around to citing the history around it.
The 2nd amendment was a compromise between those who wanted a standing army, something most of the founding fathers abhored, and those who wished that the country protect itself from its enemies by training every individual, but by not have a professional army.
Every supreme court for over 200 years has interpreted the second amendment as authorizing the private ownership of firearms...
G0MZS
10-06-2003, 06:16 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w2fgv @ Oct. 05 2003,22:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In your haste to get the fur flying, you made about 8 gramatical errors in 4 sentences...
Like I said, you're giving us all a really good laugh ![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
In my haste to get to work. Its like 6.30am just on the way to a 12 hour shift. Wisdom does not always come with age. You are living proof OM #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
No, I was wise before being old...
KD7WHQ
10-06-2003, 06:23 AM
wb0wao, The K98k is .323.. I only recently slugged it for curiousity, and the target was with jacketed. Remington 185gr PSPCL bullets, to be more precise.
If you shoot the chambering (8x57), I'll give you the load to play with http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Meanwhile..
The definition of "militia" is codified. Any able bodied male (changed to "person") between the ages of 18 and 45 is in it. Per Federal statute.
Military enlistment has no bearing.. Merely "able bodied" in the range stated. Overage, I would think to be considered reserves. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
I used to have a bookmark to the exact location in the code, but I don't seem to any more.
And as to "well regulated," if you read the papers written at the time, the term equates to sane and rational in today's terms. Language shift..
G0MZS
10-06-2003, 06:24 AM
Just like your gun law and CW you like to hold on to the past. I have the right to own a gun because the founding farthers said so in the seventeen hundreds. I do not think they would of like the way things turned out and if the could have seen in the future then I do not think you would have the 2nd.
Ok must go to work enough frivolity for now.
Yes, do trundle off to your menial little job...
You can come back and throw some acid in our faces again later.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 05 2003,23:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just like your gun law and CW you like to hold on to the past.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I don't like your expensive monarchy tradition. Y'all should chuck it.
XV2PS
10-06-2003, 06:52 AM
In my country, couples of years ago, there were more .22LR then washing machines. Yep, you might think I am french for the washing machines http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif , I am not.
So, they have regulated all. So, some years later (and I think it is still the case), to get .22LR, you need a "defense arm" license, which is quite heavy and difficult to get. But you could purchase in 5 minutes a .444 Marlin or a .300 Winchester magnum or a 12 gauge. Hehe, anything logic there?
On my own choice, all rifles are chained (no ammo,...) at home, and only unchained one is a 12 gauge with plastic pellets. I feel this a quite protective way to protect yourself.
I think that to ask the people a week delay for them to buy the rifle will let them enough time to think of it. If you really want to burn somebody, you still find guns on the black market (w/o trace).
KD7WHQ
10-06-2003, 07:01 AM
G0MZS, check this (http://jpfo.org/deathgc.htm).
Look at the dates, and tell me it can't happen again.
Enough.. The real studies are out there, the opposition falsifies theirs.
Hear about the author who now can't find a publisher because he built this fantastic case, which later turned out to be based on really fresh fertilizer?
The realities of the real world are why I will NOT give up my firearms...even if it were enacted as law, violating the constitution, that I should.
I won't resort to personal affronts, but, you really need to take a realistic look at what has gone before, and will pass again if people are not in a position to prevent it.
When WWII started, and we weren't participating, we were shipping hunting, and military surplused rifles to your country through a lend-lease program.
And after the war, your country destroyed the majority of all firearms lend-leased, and produced by Enfield.
What do you figure is going to happen when the next attack on the UK occurs? The firearms don't exist anymore to defend your country, and I seriously doubt your on-shore manufacturers can even hope to gear up fast enough. Again.
Or is this an unlikely scenario, as it was in 1935?
Now, where does this put it?
Think about it. Because the more the world changes, the more it stays the same.
And please don't take this personally. Just consider it for a while before replying..
w8amd
10-06-2003, 07:33 AM
When a person uses a firearm in a crime it is sort of telling to watch which people lash out at. The person or the inanimate object. It is easy to blame the arm and call for restrictions/bans. This avoids dealing with the true root problem.
When violent crime is rampant in any society there must be a cause within that system that leads to it. That is much harder to examine and act to solve. To blame the tool for the act of a criminal is a non-solution. May stir up a few votes and emotions but in the end will cure nothing.
Only when the root causes of violent behavior in today's society are dealt with will the incidence of such actions begin to fall.
k4dje
10-06-2003, 02:16 PM
Yea. Don't forget the KILLER SUV'S. I have to give mine asprin 3 times a day so it won't attack me.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">When violent crime is rampant in any society there must be a cause within that system that leads to it. That is much harder to examine and act to solve. To blame the tool for the act of a criminal is a non-solution. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
As long as humans have free will some will choose a violent path. Some will choose a passive path and some will fight for what is right. The only thing wrong with our society today is we are teaching our children that personal responsibility does not exist. If the child is restless we say it is ADHD and give him a drug. If someone shoots up a movie theater we blame the gun. If someone runs over a GEO metro with a SUV we blame the SUV. Nothing is our fault anymore. If I'm fat it must be FAST food's fault. ECT.........................
WAKE UP
G0MZS
10-06-2003, 03:55 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7WHQ @ Oct. 06 2003,00:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">G0MZS, check this (http://jpfo.org/deathgc.htm).
Look at the dates, and tell me it can't happen again.
Enough.. #The real studies are out there, the opposition falsifies theirs.
Hear about the author who now can't find a publisher because he built this fantastic case, which later turned out to be based on really fresh fertilizer?
The realities of the real world are why I will NOT give up my firearms...even if it were enacted as law, violating the constitution, that I should.
I won't resort to personal affronts, but, you really need to take a realistic look at what has gone before, and will pass again if people are not in a position to prevent it.
When WWII started, and we weren't participating, we were shipping hunting, and military surplused rifles to your country through a lend-lease program.
And after the war, your country destroyed the majority of all firearms lend-leased, and produced by Enfield.
What do you figure is going to happen when the next attack on the UK occurs? #The firearms don't exist anymore to defend your country, and I seriously doubt your on-shore manufacturers can even hope to gear up fast enough. #Again.
Or is this an unlikely scenario, as it was in 1935?
Now, where does this put it?
Think about it. #Because the more the world changes, the more it stays the same.
And please don't take this personally. #Just consider it for a while before replying..[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
We are talking about crime not war. In Europe and UK in 1935 people had guns but not for the same reason as you. Gun culture was not the same. Still both world wars started.
The British Forces are one of the best fighting forces in the world. Not the biggest but one of the best trained. We have nukes and home defence just as you do. We call them the TA who by the way have 2 divisions of the SAS as part of this part time fighting force who went to Afghanistan and Iraq to fight. They are not boy scouts. We have over 50 member of our Common wealth and friends in America. Do you really think that we are going to be invaded? Nah.
You underestmate the British and our grit.
We have had our share of unrest at home. Bradford riots been the latest. A few million pounds of damage. The Police contained it in one area. Infact we have had a few large riots in my life but most just claimed property damage but some life was taken. I do not know how many but you can count them on one hand. Just like our armed forces the Police are a force to recon with. They would not leave any person in danger what ever situation including a riot. Riots have always been property damage and not savage attacks on innocent people.
I watch the events of the LA riots unfold live on TV. Police drive past people in need of help. A truck driver dragged out of his cab and beat so bad for so long with a Police helicopter above. 58 people died and 7 billion dollas worth of damage. The LA police was told not to go into the area! Even though people were been killed.
This is a time you need a gun to protect yourself and family, a time when you are left on your own when the people paid to protect you do not lift a finger to help. I think it is called Anarchy when all form of law breaks down to the point of lawlessness. We watched communities grouped together with guns protecting there families and the weak in the community. I guess they would have been many more death if you was not able to own a gun.
We will never have this problem. Our social problems are not the same as our culture is not the same. We share many values but we live in different worlds. The British Police are our first line of defence and stamp out unrest not run away from it. Tanks have been deployed on the streets of England only once and that was because of this latest terrorist threat that has been created because of our involvement in Iraq and the airports in London was though to be at risk. Our Pariment building had a tank parked outside it for a couple of days as well.
We do not need guns in England nor do we need our Police walking around with guns. We are still a civilised Nation of good people but we do have undesireable people in our country and always will, tis a fact of life.
Americans need to have protection. How can a family man go to work and leave his wife and kids without protection? What is he to do when he wakes up one night with a drugged up crook in his kids bedroom with a knife or a gun? How is he to protect his car and life from car jackers with knifes or guns, street muggers that jump him while he is having a walk in the park with his family? What about protecting his shop from robbers?
What about the good American that can not afford to live in an affluent area and lives in a "no go" area, large parts of cities infested with gang culture, drive by shootings, high school shootings. (You wont find a school in the whole of England that has to have armed security and metal detectors at the school gates.) Drug gangs crack houses protected by small armies of crooks. Black gangs, white gangs, Spanish gangs, Irish gangs mexican gangs, Italiain Mafia. The list goes on. All shooting robbing murdering raping and on and on and on. This goes on in American cities on a massive scale!
Watch a Police program made in England. Most trouble is because of our beer lout culture. The young getting drunk and fighting on a weekend. Yes we do have drug dealers drug problems but it is thousands of years away from your problems.
Yes I think Good living American need to have a gun to protect themselves. I can go anywhere in England without a gun and without fear anytime of night or day. The biggest fear would be fro a drunken lout who didnt like the way I talked. 99% of the time just walk away say nothing and thats the end of that. Watching an American Police program is just like watching a Charles Bronson or Clint Eastwood film. People getting shot, crushing cars with run away tanks! It like Hollywood! Have you seen an English real life hospital program. Very boring. Just opperations and the odd face stitched up after a drunken fight. We always watch American real life hospital programs. Shootings all the time, do you know you are more likly to survive a shooting in an American hospital than anywhere in the world? Ask yourself why, some claim eh?
Tell me this. Would you like to feel safe where ever you go in your own country without having to have a gun or even sleep at night without a gun under your pillow? Many Americans sleep with a gun near. Wouldnt it be a better America if you didnt need to sleep with a gun?
I sleep every night without a gun and am never woken up by gun shots.
America is a great Nation with wonderfull people who are now world leaders in many things. I have friends and family who are Americans and live in America. I love the people and I love your great country. But lets not kid ourselves about what goes on.
I did think about this one.
kc7jty
10-06-2003, 06:09 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 04 2003,13:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Never had a gun, never needed one. I have always felt safe. My XYL can walk anywhere in our city anytime on her own and get back safe.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Thats the way the fathers of Polly Class and Mark Goldman felt until their children were murdered......but, boy did the crap hit the fan then.
How big is your town? I'll bet there are many in the US the same size that can make the same claim. Sorry, Gary, Indiana is not included.
KC7JTY
G0MZS
10-06-2003, 06:30 PM
My freedom of speech has been gagged on the forum (In so many words) So I wont reply. My posts might disappear.
73 to all, if you find me on the band come say hello.
AE6IP
10-06-2003, 06:47 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc7jty @ Oct. 06 2003,11:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 04 2003,13:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Never had a gun, never needed one. I have always felt safe. My XYL can walk anywhere in our city anytime on her own and get back safe.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Thats the way the fathers of Polly Class and Mark Goldman felt until their children were murdered......but, #boy did the crap hit the fan then.
#How big is your town? I'll bet there are many in the US the same size that can make the same claim. Sorry, Gary, Indiana is not included.
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #KC7JTY[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Her name was Polly Klaas. Armed parents would have made no difference, because of the way she was kidnapped.
The Polly Klaas Foundation (http://www.pollyklaas.org/safe/index.htm) web site has a section on keeping your children safe. Nowhere in it does it suggest that you, or they, carry firearms.
If you really want to do something positive about keeping kids safe, go to the web site and make a donation.
AE6IP
10-06-2003, 06:58 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w2fgv @ Oct. 05 2003,23:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Every supreme court for over 200 years has interpreted the second amendment as authorizing the private ownership of firearms...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
The supreme court rarely hears 2nd amendment cases; but when it does, it routinely rules that the government has the right to regulate arms. #see Findlaw (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/) for more details, from which:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In United States v. Miller, the Court sustained a statute requiring registration under the National Firearms Act of sawed-off shotguns. After reciting the original provisions of the Constitution dealing with the militia, the Court observed that ''{w}ith obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted with that end in view.''The significance of the militia, the Court continued, was that it was composed of ''civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.'' It was upon this force that the States could rely for defense and securing of the laws, on a force that ''comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense,'' who, ''when called for service . . . were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.''Therefore, ''{i}n the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well- regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.''
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
ei5ja
10-07-2003, 12:27 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Oct. 05 2003,22:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[
Looks like most of them AK47s are being used, against the Americans. And by the way i see Iraq is more stable around the British, wonder why. Maybe it's because they are not killing innocent men women and children, why, because they are professionals and not nervous gun touting racoon hunters #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
OUCH!!
ei5ja
10-07-2003, 12:53 AM
Just a little aside on the arming of policemen.
In Dublin today armed robbers shot a Publican who was bringing his 'takings' of €50,000 to the bank. They shot him in the leg despite the publican telling them to take the money. The robbers were spotted by an unarmed Garda patrol car. After a chase, the thieves abandoned their vehicle and legged it. The unarmed gardai gave chase and apprehended the thieves, despite being fired on and being unarmed. The bravery of the Gardai showed that it was not necessary to be armed to be effective. Had this been in the USA either the bandits or the police would be dead.
It is too late to do anything about arms control in America, but you should think about what your founding fathers had in mind when they spoke of the right to raise militia etc. They were speaking in a post colonial context having recently been engaged in a war of independence and not knowing where the next threat would come from.
You now (as was mentioned in one of the posts) have a regular and professionally trained armed force together with your National Guard to meet these threats. So the argument for the retention of personal weapons is no longer valid.
One must make the observation that the personal arms industry creates a lot of employment and concommitant wealth and therefore Americans have a commercial vested interest in keeping the right to bear arms This will always be the case.
73 and poor huntin'
Ed http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
ai4ep
10-07-2003, 01:31 AM
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif looks like this G0MZS fellow has a lot of folks reading his " posts " real carefully ( no insult intended ) ... or he may just want attention ( bad attention to him might be better than NO attention ) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif ...might ought to go easy on him, apparently computer operators & amateur station in the same home arent too common in his area and he has to represent his whole country all by his self . He has a lot of weight on his shoulders, and might be feeling stressed out. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif NO I aint backing what he says, but I will refrain from being too nasty at him. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
KC9ECI
10-07-2003, 02:01 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ei5ja @ Oct. 06 2003,17:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just a little aside on the arming of policemen.
In Dublin today armed robbers shot a Publican who was bringing his 'takings' of €50,000 to the bank. They shot him in the leg despite the publican telling them to take the money. The robbers were spotted by an unarmed Garda patrol car. After a chase, the thieves abandoned their vehicle and legged it. The unarmed gardai gave chase and apprehended the thieves, despite being fired on and being unarmed. The bravery of the Gardai showed that it was not necessary to be armed to be effective. Had this been in the USA either the bandits or the police would be dead.
It is too late to do anything about arms control in America, but you should think about what your founding fathers had in mind when they spoke of the right to raise militia etc. They were speaking in a post colonial context having recently been engaged in a war of independence and not knowing where the next threat would come from.
You now (as was mentioned in one of the posts) have a regular and professionally trained armed force together with your National Guard to meet these threats. So the argument for the retention of personal weapons is no longer valid.
One must make the observation that the personal arms industry creates a lot of employment and concommitant wealth and therefore Americans have a commercial vested interest in keeping the right to bear arms This will always be the case.
73 and poor huntin'
Ed http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
What equals brave to one, equals insane to another. I admire the fact that he caught them, I just question the sanity of his actions in doing so.
N0WVA
10-07-2003, 03:00 AM
Ive always wondered..Why do some of us always blindly give up our freedom and privacy , all in the name of "safety"? Its people like the gun control advocates that will willingly and happily allow the chip implants to be implemented. All in the name of "safety".
gdouds
10-07-2003, 03:26 AM
Given that G0MZS is from the UK, I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the role the British Crown played in the development of the Second Amendment to our Constitution.
Simply put, the necessity of the individual possession and use of firearms for the defense of our country is greater than the occasional harm to individuals.
Don't even try the "regular army" argument -- the fact remains that gun ownership by the general public is a strong deterrent to any kind of homeland invasion. #Even if the military fails, invaders would have to get past millions of armed and angry citizens.
That, and the legitimate fear that the U.S. government might some day get out of control (e.g., Hitler and Germany), is what the Second Amendment is about. #Personal protection is important but secondary.
We don't really care how the UK "subjects" handle the issue of private ownership of guns. #We are NOT subjects, we WILL NOT BE subjects, and so our culture and opinions come from a very different perspective.
KB3GDD
What is the most powerful weapon a private citizen should be allowed to own? BB gun? 44 magnum? 50 cal machine gun? Rocket-propelled grenades?
WA6CAW
10-07-2003, 04:53 AM
Could this Be http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif?
STATUS DATE JOINED #OF POSTS
GOMZS Banned Feb. 2003 1
XV2PS
10-07-2003, 05:23 AM
ei5ja</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The unarmed gardai gave chase and apprehended the thieves, despite being fired on and being unarmed. The bravery of the Gardai showed that it was not necessary to be armed to be effective.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I do not want to upset anybody here, but let me tell this:
Yes, this is bravery. Really bravery, nobody could deny. But now imagine that one gardai got shot to dead, I guess that many people would have claimed that it was stupidity. They also would not be completely wrong. So, sometimes, it is difficult to show the border between bravery and stupidity.
The gardais have been also very lucky don't you think so?
I bet that if somebody tries unarmed to catch me, I am going to give him a hollow life, except I am really unlucky.
I got rescue diver trained. A basic principle is "do not put your life at risk to save somebody". Forgive me for the wording that might be inacurate. But I think it tells a few. There are calculated risks and a decision should be according to what we are ready to pay to get something.
Nowadays, criminality has no limit. They will shoot for nothing. I liked the idea of British police not to be armed (if I am right), and it had reasons in that context, but society changes......
Hope nobody got offended, this was not intended...
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
AE6IP
10-07-2003, 07:10 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (gdouds @ Oct. 06 2003,20:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't even try the "regular army" argument -- the fact remains that gun ownership by the general public is a strong deterrent to any kind of homeland invasion. #Even if the military fails, invaders would have to get past millions of armed and angry citizens.
That, and the legitimate fear that the U.S. government might some day get out of control (e.g., Hitler and Germany), is what the Second Amendment is about. #Personal protection is important but secondary.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
WW-II pretty much put an end to the myth of an armed populace being an effective deterent, with its graphic demonstration of what some small minded people like to call shock and awe.
The US government routinely gets out of control. Guns have nothing to do with reining it in; rather that brilliantly designed check and balances triangle tends to do that. I'm sure sanity will be along any day now to rein in the current excesses.
AE6IP
10-07-2003, 07:11 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kn6z @ Oct. 06 2003,21:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What is the most powerful weapon a private citizen should be allowed to own? #BB gun? #44 magnum? 50 cal machine gun? #Rocket-propelled grenades?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
tactical nuclear weapons.
KC9ECI
10-07-2003, 10:05 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kn6z @ Oct. 06 2003,21:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What is the most powerful weapon a private citizen should be allowed to own? BB gun? 44 magnum? 50 cal machine gun? Rocket-propelled grenades?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
It isn't the size of your weapon, it's how well you use it.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0WVA @ Oct. 06 2003,20:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ive always wondered..Why do some of us always blindly give up #our freedom and privacy , all in the name of "safety"?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ok, let's keep our eyes open on this one. Are there any weapons you would ban in the name of safety?
w9ass
10-07-2003, 11:34 AM
I have nothing but pity for the citizens of the UK and Australia, as well as any other country that prohibits the owning of firearms for personal usage. Whether yo shoot for sport or to defend your family and personal property, I and millions of law abiding citizens give you mad props.
Since the UK doesnt have the traditional constitution like the USA, the situation and climate of argument is much different. There will always be gun crime, period. There will only be more if persons decide to lobby against the personal right to bear arms and turn the US into the UK.
I had the sad privilege to see an NRA video in which hundreds of English firearms were destroyed, some being family heirlooms worth considerable sums of money. If this strays from the topic, oh well. Let one thing be clear: Let Americans and non-Americans alike take up arms an fight for what is right. The USA is becoming more and more vulnerable every day to outside attack, and it is either you or your assailant that walks away alive. Call it to the point, call it absurd, but it is an undeniable truth nonetheless.
Situations like this could have been eliminated quite possibly with concealed-carry provisions and some street sense. Anyways, give it some deep thought and look into getting a FOID card if you don't have one already...Just another serious topic that needs to be considered and acted upon rather than complained about. 73 and God Bless America and the Free World!
KC9DGM
KI4BOO
10-07-2003, 11:49 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kn6z @ Oct. 06 2003,21:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What is the most powerful weapon a private citizen should be allowed to own? #BB gun? #44 magnum? 50 cal machine gun? #Rocket-propelled grenades?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You know, I'm no lawyer, but I dont recall any laws stating that I can't own a nuclear missle.
If I go into my backyard right now and start to build a missle silo, who will stop me? (tater, I need a good rocket scientist...)
The UN? Ehh... They only make suggestions. They can't tell us Americans what to do, you know. We're Americans after all.
Har!
G0MZS
10-07-2003, 01:00 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC9DGM @ Oct. 07 2003,04:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let Americans and non-Americans alike take up arms an fight for what is right. The USA is becoming more and more vulnerable every day to outside attack, and it is either you or your assailant that walks away alive. Call it to the point, call it absurd, but it is an undeniable truth nonetheless.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This is true but the attacks and the kind of #threat now possed can not be fought by the populous with guns. You will not be invaded it will never happen. Dirty bombs, car bombs, suicide, germ and Bio is now the threat from the ememy and not the boat landing of mass troop that was once the case. The idea of an outside attack that will bring civilians on the street with guns to defend there country is never going to happen. If a LA type riot happens again then yes, but not from outside.
The only way civilians can fight outside threats now is by observation.
ai4ep
10-07-2003, 02:12 PM
...so the threat to the usa is not to take over the geographic country, but to harass, mutilate, hurt the general public, and then run for cover and be the chickens that they really are.....something to the effect of a sniper at a sporting event or a car bomb at a shopping center ...some " afraid to show their face " type of stuff ? Sounds about like them, they have been doing that in the middle east for years ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
MZS and others who believe the the current crop of 'modern' weaponry will make the ownership/use of firearms by the general population 'obsolete' and/or 'ineffective/useless/unnecessary' are... (please pardon the DELIBERATE pun) 'dead' wrong.
Yes, weapons with a LARGE sphere of destructive influence (Dirty bombs, car bombs, tactical nukes, etc.) CAN AND DO disable/destroy a sizable area of the target zone.
BUT!!! NONE of these devices - from the smallest chemical/biological weapon to the largest nuclear device can WIPE out the population to the point that it can be TOTALLY overrun to the point of defeat IF... IF the private citizen has the means to defend themselves. #
**ONCE THE IMMEDIATE DANGER IS PAST** then the ARMED private citizen will be able to keep unwanted persons from entering THEIR personal space.
This SHALL guarantee that infected/suspected infected folks AND those who choose to continue to promote the attack SHALL be unable to continue. Without arms.. the influx and attacks of the those who seek to further the battle SHALL occur.. unabated and unfettered and the end result is SURE defeat. #THAT IS WHY THE ARMED CITIZEN IS A LAST LINE OF DEFENSE AND IS MANDATORY TO HAVE IN PLACE.
Why is the above true? Simple. The geography on the U.S. based on it's sheer size and diverse locations of viable population/food centers will not permit the level of devastation necessary to assure total victory in the attacks as noted by previous posters as long as INDIVIDUAL ARMED CITIZENS ARE PRESENT TO DEFEND AGAINST SAID VICTORY.
BIOWEAPONS - BIOweapons lack the ability to operate across the VAST terrain of the USA due to sheer size of the Country. A BIOweapon needs a living host to transmit itself. NO HOST.. it dies off. #When a BIO weapon is used.. it will have a range of effect UNTIL the population either ceases to interact due to NOTICE OR the ability of the target population to travel to uninfected areas is reduced and/or eliminated. THEN it dies off and ceases to be a threat. #
THE DOWNSIDE... BIOAGENTS can be designed (have been designed) that are 'timed release' so as to assure a wider spread of the agent than just a immediate effect weapon. The DIFFERECNE is that once detection is made.. protective measures can be taken. Same result. only takes longer and amount of damage is greater. #BUT the defense by armed citizens still applies once the danger is mitigated.
CHEMICAL WEAPONS - Same thing, only not passed by living host. Usually requires contact #either by ingestion of an aerosal, gaseous, or liquid agent. #Again.. the destruction/damage is limited to the immediate area of the target exposure. ONCE alert is given and physical contact is eliminated.. the weapons effectiveness ends. #
Armed Citizen provides last line of defense outside immediate target zone of effected area.
Nuclear - same thing although effects are LIMITED by terrain, weather, and weapon accuracy. #Immediate effects are devastating, but ability to live and survive outside immediate target zone are high.
Armed incursions - EVEN more reason why armed citizens are needed. Yes, an Army with tech weapons CAN be quite effective with use of the 'shock and awe' technique but that ONLYworks in the area where shock and awe are used. Once the tactic is used, the other side will take proactive measures to limit the effectiveness.
As we saw in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, AND other battles (including Iraq, today) #'guerrilla actions' by armed citizens can and do play a LARGE part in harrassment of the organzied better equipped and managed force - AND keep the organized army tied up in KNOTS and limit its' effectiveness and ability to move and attack becuase resources are drained to protect against guerilla actions.
The French underground gave the Germans A FIT in WW2. The AFghans gave the Soviet Union a continaul enema EVEN though the Sov's were FAR better equipped and the like.
So it goes through out the history of battles.
AN ARMED CITIZEN, DEFENDING HIS HOME TURF, IS ONE OF THE WORST ENEMIES ANY ARMY CAN FACE, regardless of the weaponry used.
And that.. my friends, is DOCUMENTED fact. #EVERY military doctrine.. training.. and instruction stresses that fact and makes note of it during operational planning.
k3FT