bansobaby
Accustomly titled
That’s a very interesting web site, thanks for posting the link.
Guns,guns, and more Guns
- Thread starter TRITON
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
That’s a very interesting web site, thanks for posting the link.
artie
Sawdust manufacturer.
Haven't you noticed that The District of Columbia is not in the United states?
There were a lot of questions asked regarding the accuracy of vote counting in the last presidential election, still not settled last I heard.
But even so and even in the UK how many of the population actually voted for the party calling the shots?
So long live the wild west concept, but once all the land was owned by someone then what hope did that revolutionary spirit have as there was nothing left to gain and so people settled down under the thumb of so called democracy.
Someone sent me a PM more familiar with the restrictions in the US - there's a middle ground for restricted hardware. A "tax stamp" where you pay for a background check from the fed. gov in the US and you get your purchases recorded and reported to local authorities.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-extremely-difficult-and-especially-expensive
I don't know anyone who has done this without a class III license, but I don't know many of the latter in the first place who aren't gun dealers, and it could be that the one guy I know who is a collector is both to make it easier for him to buy and sell.
In the interest of factual accuracy (as there was never a point where I would've considered any of the above - owning something that was even military styled (like an AR 15) was beyond my limits of taste).
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-extremely-difficult-and-especially-expensive
I don't know anyone who has done this without a class III license, but I don't know many of the latter in the first place who aren't gun dealers, and it could be that the one guy I know who is a collector is both to make it easier for him to buy and sell.
In the interest of factual accuracy (as there was never a point where I would've considered any of the above - owning something that was even military styled (like an AR 15) was beyond my limits of taste).
Trainee neophyte
Established Member
I dont know if you are aware of this, but the USA is not a democracy: it is a republic - a very different fish. It has now morphed into a "representative democracy", which seems to mean government by the oligarchy, but the founding fathers were very, very leery of anything democratic, because it is a tyranny of the majority. Still, that would be better than a tyranny of the billionaire class, or even worse a tyranny of scientism - both of which we seem to have this week.
I think that quote at the time was, "You have a republic - if you can keep it". It's possible that they couldn't.
Off topic (again) but what's people's thoughts on this? Imo I think they had every right to show the arms but not fire until an attempt to clearly harm them was made. I.e self defence only.
Article attached for reference.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....-blm-demo-gun-pardon-b1896324.html?amp?espv=1
Article attached for reference.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....-blm-demo-gun-pardon-b1896324.html?amp?espv=1
Because it should have been done. There are two sets of rights those of the individual and society. In this country we hold people on bail before trial if there is enough evidence to convince a court they may post a significant threat or are likely to abscond. Strangely we don't let them buy machine guns.
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
"There were a lot of questions asked regarding the accuracy of vote counting in the last presidential election, still not settled last I heard."
Yeah, there are a lot of questions asked about whether the earth is flat, or Santa Claus exists. Also still not settled, last I heard.
Yeah, there are a lot of questions asked about whether the earth is flat, or Santa Claus exists. Also still not settled, last I heard.
The vote count questioning is hocum. If there was anything significant in terms of vote count errors, it would be provable in court. The candidate who got the most votes (relatively easily) won, and if anyone doesn't like it, they should examine the behavior of the prior President first and then see if they can figure out why something easily proven in court (inaccurate vote totals) never materialized.
I do apologise I should have paid more attention to where you were, it's a federal district isn't it?
In relation to your further comment, that's democracy ! Being governed by people most of us didn't actually vote for! Daft in many ways I agree, PR would be better in my opinion. However you do it you will always have a significant proportion of the population being governed by the people they didn't vote for, still no real reason to claim to be oppressed, still less to take to the streets with guns. The recent decision in relation to travelling vigilantes, or whatever you want to call them, was an eye opener. Presumably next time there is some large scale public disorder people will be flooding in from miles around with automatic weapons, keen to take advantage of any opportunity to "defend themselves".
dannyr
Established Member
Did a little girl just shoot herself dead on Christmas day?
Suffer the cihldren.
Suffer the cihldren.
That's not a very good analogy. People who are on bail awaiting trial have been charged with an offence, so the CPS at least are convinced there is a case against them, and that they are likely to be convicted. Your initial reference was to people who are on a watch list. Now some may be on that list because they are convicted terrorists, but other will be there because they are simply suspected of involvement in some kind of offending, or are known to sympathise with the ideals of, say ISIS. If we go down the road where people's rights can be restricted in the basis of mere suspicion, that is a very slippery slope. The police for example can arrest you on suspicion of having committed an offence, but have to then quickly establish their case sufficiently for you to be charged, or let you go.
IMO Showing your ability to defend yourself to a potentially dangerous mob could well be the best course of action, better than looking vulnerable then having to kill to protect yourself. Pointing the weapon crosses a line, is it justified, I think you would have to be there to know. I sometimes think our laws go to far to protect the guilty have you heard of Tony Martin a Norfolk (UK) farmer who shot a burglar in his home, in his case the law could not protect him but he was convicted this explains why
https://www.oakwoodtraining.co.uk/tony-martin-found-guilty/
In better circumstances he should not have done what he did. But he was an old man, these people broke into his home not once but repeatedly, he did not get adequate protection from the law and I don't think the effect of this over years was properly understood by the jury, the fact he lied may have swayed them and obviously I haven't seen the evidence they saw.
Where the line should be drawn I'm not qualified to say, I don't think our courts always get it right but I still have a better impression of our system than the American one.
True. But there is quite a difference between imprisonment and not being allowed to buy an AR15
artie
Sawdust manufacturer.
I've never heard of someone being pardoned for a misdemeanor before.
I think they did the right thing, they let the protestors know they were armed and gave them the opportunity to leave them alone. Which they wisely did.
They could have stayed hidden inside and, under the castle doctrine blew away any who entered. A much worse outcome for everyone.
But here's something I have often wondered watching American cop documentaries.
Cops pull their guns regularly and point them at people during traffic stops, street stops etc.
How is this not assault/battery or whatever term is applicable?
Not really. I am not a supporter of unrestricted access to firearms, in my view no one should be allowed to own military type firearms.. However if you live somewhere where you do have the right to buy such weapons then it is a dangerous idea that that, or indeed any other right, should be restricted on the basis of mere suspicion, without evidence.
Droogs
Not the Sharpest Moderator in the box
Quite a few have gone on to commit acts of violence, we the ones on MI5s watchlists have.
Similar threads
