On Nov 29, 4:13*pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:57:07 -0500, Wayne.B

wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That don't make so much sense when the outlaws were able to get the
jump on 4 guys with guns and a bunch of training.

How many of these guys do you suppose came out of the military?

JPS, your statement *Don't make so much sense." But it matches your
mode of reasoning.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.



That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Nov 29, 6:01*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message

...

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Pffftttt, talk about naive

"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message
...
On Nov 29, 6:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message

...

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Pffftttt, talk about naive


Is that the sound you make when you bend over?

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Go to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:29 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Go to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.

Space cadets see things through their own baby-blue glasses you know.

http://tinyurl.com/y8enhm7
--

John H

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Go to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.


Sure is easy for you to cite a statistic without any correlation to
regulation. Sure wish we had such a serious problem as the UK, with a
whopping 236 shootings. I think you'll find the number is a bit higher here
in the US.

The final, laughable "fact" is that you're claiming that criminals are going
to be mass producing home-made guns. We might run out of sporks!

--
Nom=de=Plume

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.


Yeah. More laws. That ought to do it. It certainly has worked so far,
hasn't it?

Steve

On Nov 29, 5:01*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message

...

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

--
Nom=de=Plume

W-O-O-O-O-SH!

"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message

...

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.

That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.

--
Nom=de=Plume

W-O-O-O-O-SH!


Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume