How many more?
 

OzOne wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:54:30 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message ...
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:57:43 -0400, katy
scribbled thusly:


Becasue the liberals passed the HIPPA (Hralth Insurance Portability and
Protection Act) laaws which disallow any release of medical information
if not specifically permitted by the patient...to release medical
information without the express permission of the subject is a breach of
privacy under this act and is prosecutable...hey...the libs wrote
it...talk to them...kid should have been in an institution...libs got
rid of those too so the mentally ill could mainstream with the rest of
society...

OK, so you have a set of loose gun control regulations which will
allow mentally unstable people to purchase a pistol because their
illness is only their affair.
Great!

That pretty well sums it up. Of course it's wrong, but it's the way our
government works. But your professed alternative is completely without
merit as well. How would you expect our seriously-flawed government to do a
gun-grab or gun control correctly? Your faith in our government is not
shared by most Americans.

Max


We have a seriously flawed Govt....a pseudo dictatorship...yet we
managed a gun grab.

.... of approx 10% (being generous) of firearms in Australia.

Admittedly we got in early, and now are working on getting the illegal
guns off the streets, along with the owners.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody has
bought a *new* gun since 1996, Oz? What I've heard is, the number of guns sold
post 1996 is now greater than the number handed in.

Difference is, these are all brand new modern firearms, not clapped out 22RF
semiautos. Either way, there are more firearms in private hands now than there
were 10 years ago. At least registered ones. Kind of screws your argument but
never mind, you'll have a cognitive disconnect and fail to take this on board.

As for getting illegal guns off the streets, sorry, Easter has gone and the
Easter bunny is resting until next year.

PDW

How many more?
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On 18 Apr 2007 19:49:32 -0700, lid (Jonathan Ganz) said:

Halliburton

Ah, and Ganz chants his magic mantra and all-purpose reply again.

So, you think it's ok to rip off the American taxpayer. Got it.

I think that if you believe chanting a mantra such as "Halliburton" is a
substitute for rational argument, you're deluding yourself, and looking
foolish in the process.


No. I prefer to change Karl (Actung!) Rove, but it only rhymes with dove,
and that doesn't seem to fit.

Since neither is either a substitute for the rational argument I've been
using, I think you're the one who looks foolish trying to defend the
Bush/Iraq fiasco.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

Bill wrote:
Sure thing Bill. - And if laws don't do any good (since criminals are
going to ignore them anyway), maybe we ought to eliminate all those laws
against rape, murder, assault, deceptive trade practices, etc., etc. -
That's were your argument logically takes us.


I never said that laws do no good and we shoudl get rid of them.
Where are getting this from? I said more laws are not going to help
this situation. Properly enforcing the ones we have will help and
trying to help people before hey go nuts instead of turning the other
way will help. Many people knew this kid was crazy but did nothing to
help.


Why is your opinion regarding different (more) laws different from that
regarding the laws we already have? - What's so good about the existing
laws (that apparently causes you to regard them differently than new
laws)? You're not being consistent when you say that more (or different)
laws would be useless, but we shouldn't cancel the ones we have.



Bill, you need to put away all that NRA propaganda for a few days and
listen to what OzOne, Capt., and Jonathan are trying to tell you. (Am I
right? - You ARE posting opinions based on what you have been reading in
NRA publications. - Right?)


No I don't read NRA publications. They are too extreme for me. I
watch the news, talk to people, look at statistics and talk to a lot
of criminal experts like my Dad who is a retired police officer,
criminal justice instructor, police academy D.I. and Police
consultant. There is also a really good freind of mine who is a
lawyer and gun owner that studied gun laws at Harvard law school,
among many other things and shares my opinion on the matter. I don't
get my opinions from liberal media but from experts.

If you are getting your information and opinions from police and from
Harvard law graduates, I'm impressed. But I think it's pretty well
accepted that most police chiefs in large departments favor more
restrictive gun regulations.

Jim

How many more?
 

Maxprop wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
t...


Maxprop wrote:

OzOne wrote in message
...


On 17 Apr 2007 12:24:24 -0700, Bill
scribbled thusly:



Before proper gun control is instituted.....or are you really that
afraid of everything?

Yes lets blame the gun. it's the guns fault those people are dead,
not the person who knowingly killed them.


Guns don't kill people, people do? How many people do you think he would
have killed if he tried to use two knives, instead of two guns? Or two
clubs, or two brass knuckles? Or two pairs of scissors? Staple guns?
Machetes?

Jim


Learn to appropriate correctly, you twit. That's not my statement.

Max

Where the hell did I say it was? But what you said included essentially
the same, simplistic thesis. - Don't blame the gun. - It's not the guns'
fault. (No one said it was the gun, without the shooter, that kills.)

Jim

How many more?
 

Bill wrote:

Guns don't kill people, people do? How many people do you think he would
have killed if he tried to use two knives, instead of two guns? Or two
clubs, or two brass knuckles? Or two pairs of scissors? Staple guns?
Machetes?

Jim


Or fertilizer and gasoline. 168 Timothy McVeigh.


And how many people were killed in the US by the use of fertilizer or
gasoline last year? And, what percentage of murders in the last ten
years involved the use of fertilizer or gasoline?

Jim

How many more?
 

"PDW" wrote in message
...
OzOne wrote:


Admittedly we got in early, and now are working on getting the illegal
guns off the streets, along with the owners.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody
has
bought a *new* gun since 1996, Oz? What I've heard is, the number of guns
sold
post 1996 is now greater than the number handed in.

That is a typical response to stricter controls on certain types of guns,
Pete. Same thing happened here after the so-called 'assault weapon ban' was
enacted. Everyone who ever thought they'd want one scrambled to buy up the
last of them. Or so it seemed. Fact is that the importation of Chinese and
Russian guns flooded the market and ultimately the speculative investors
(who believed they'd make a killing--no pun intended--through buying and
selling them) found themselves stuck with lots of guns and no market. Since
the lapse of the 'ban' the market for paramilitary weapons has all but dried
up.

Max

How many more?
 

OzOne wrote in message ...

You have no clue, My friends who stayed in the police have spoken
about the constant investigations and recovery of illegal and
unlicenced weapons including pistols.
It's an ongoing effort with good results despite what the
sensationalist journalists allude to when they report a few shots
fired at a house somewhere and neglect to report on the investigation
and arrest of the culprits.

I saw something today that surprised me, Oz. Apparently Switzerland and
Israel both require their citizen militia members to take their
fully-automatic weapons home with them, ostensibly in order to have them at
the ready should the militia be called up. On a per capita basis, those
countries have far more automatic weapons than any other country in the
world. Yet neither of those countries have citizens that shoot each other
the way we do in the USA.

This tends to support the argument that the problem here is cultural, not
guns. Americans kill other Americans, and until we address why this is so,
removing guns from the equation may diminish the problem somewhat, but it
will fall far short of solving it.

Max

How many more?
 

"JimC" wrote in message
. net...


Maxprop wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
t...


Maxprop wrote:

OzOne wrote in message
m...


On 17 Apr 2007 12:24:24 -0700, Bill
scribbled thusly:



Before proper gun control is instituted.....or are you really that
afraid of everything?

Yes lets blame the gun. it's the guns fault those people are dead,
not the person who knowingly killed them.


Guns don't kill people, people do? How many people do you think he would
have killed if he tried to use two knives, instead of two guns? Or two
clubs, or two brass knuckles? Or two pairs of scissors? Staple guns?
Machetes?

Jim


Learn to appropriate correctly, you twit. That's not my statement.

Max
Where the hell did I say it was? But what you said included essentially
the same, simplistic thesis. - Don't blame the gun. - It's not the guns'
fault. (No one said it was the gun, without the shooter, that kills.)

My name appeared at the top, and the last sentence was obviously attributed
to me, in error.

But to answer your question above: bull****. Don't put words in my mouth.
To do so leaves your credibility in serious doubt.

Max

How many more?
 

"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

OzOne wrote in message
...

You have no clue, My friends who stayed in the police have spoken
about the constant investigations and recovery of illegal and
unlicenced weapons including pistols.
It's an ongoing effort with good results despite what the
sensationalist journalists allude to when they report a few shots
fired at a house somewhere and neglect to report on the investigation
and arrest of the culprits.

I saw something today that surprised me, Oz. Apparently Switzerland and
Israel both require their citizen militia members to take their
fully-automatic weapons home with them, ostensibly in order to have them
at the ready should the militia be called up. On a per capita basis,
those countries have far more automatic weapons than any other country in
the world. Yet neither of those countries have citizens that shoot each
other the way we do in the USA.

This tends to support the argument that the problem here is cultural, not
guns. Americans kill other Americans, and until we address why this is
so, removing guns from the equation may diminish the problem somewhat, but
it will fall far short of solving it.

Max

Yup.. of course, for the Israeli's there's another issue. And, thank God the
Swiss are neutral.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

How many more?
 

"PDW" wrote in message ...
OzOne wrote:
...
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody has
bought a *new* gun since 1996, Oz? What I've heard is, the number of guns sold
post 1996 is now greater than the number handed in.

Who needs a new gun. One that I remember fondly was a .577/450 calibre Martini action
from Indian campaigns. The cartridge was obsolete so the owner rechambered and
put on a new barrel. I can't remember what it was changed to, but it had somewhat
of a kick.

T.

Difference is, these are all brand new modern firearms, not clapped out 22RF
semiautos. Either way, there are more firearms in private hands now than there
were 10 years ago. At least registered ones. Kind of screws your argument but
never mind, you'll have a cognitive disconnect and fail to take this on board.

As for getting illegal guns off the streets, sorry, Easter has gone and the
Easter bunny is resting until next year.

Hmmm. The guy that owned the Martini WAS a rabbit inspector...

PDW