| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What the 'ell??
wrote:
On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. |
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote:
See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
thumper wrote:
On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote: See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? Someone might. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
On 12/31/2012 4:56 PM, Califbill wrote:
thumper wrote: On 12/31/2012 1:23 PM, Califbill wrote: See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. If they tried that here you'd shoot him? Someone might. I prefer elections. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 11:19:05 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. Here's how who does it? You do know that Canada makes it's own laws, eh? That lady is talking about Britain. Being next door to y'all makes it much harder to control hand guns and ammunition. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
On 1/1/13 12:55 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 11:19:05 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. Here's how who does it? You do know that Canada makes it's own laws, eh? That lady is talking about Britain. Being next door to y'all makes it much harder to control hand guns and ammunition. Even so, Canada is a far safer country than the United States, especially as it relates to firearm murders. It's funny that you bring up that bit about Canada making its own laws. Undereducated Americans think Elizabeth II is the head of government in Canada, rather than just the head of state. In the 2008 elections, Sarah Palin thought the Queen, not the Prime Minister, was the head of government of the United Kingdom. D'oh. The Queen is the head of state, the constitutional monarch. Of course, Palin was the dumbest candidate for high elective office in the history of the United States, and much beloved by righties of similar intellectual capabilities. |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article ,
says... On Tuesday, January 1, 2013 11:19:05 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. Here's how who does it? You do know that Canada makes it's own laws, eh? That lady is talking about Britain. Being next door to y'all makes it much harder to control hand guns and ammunition. Why is the Queen your head of state? |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
iBoaterer wrote:
In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. The murder rate in England is about one third the US. Guns are very tightly controlled, so the weapon of choice is different. Robbery and assault are at a higher rate than the US. Remove the drug war shootings, and our rate would plummet. New York has always had a higher murder rate, and had control a decade earlier than England. We are also a country that was settled by people with a more aggressive tendency. |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
What the 'ell??
In article 975696028378760049.779817bmckeenospam-
, says... iBoaterer wrote: In article 1805701577378681744.653332bmckeenospam- , says... wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 4:22:26 PM UTC-4, Califbill wrote: wrote: On Monday, December 31, 2012 8:58:58 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... Looks like things are getting crazier by the minute down there... http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity...-shooting.html What is YOUR solution? Disarm the population...with an exception for shotguns and legitimate hunting rifles. The founders did not include gun rights because of hunting. They wanted the leaders to have a fear of the populace. The problem we have, and seeing a few mass murders in Canada also, the problem includes canada, is that we have both a general breakdown in society and a mental health system that is mostly nonexistent and overly constrained by law. All the more reason to limit ownership of firearms. See what the control advocates in Canada have accomplished. You can have you petty dictator run roughshod all he wants. Here's how you do it: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...12/gun-control And, to be crude, having few guns does mean that few people get shot. In 2008-2009, there were 39 fatal injuries from crimes involving firearms in England and Wales, with a population about one sixth the size of America?s. In America, there were 12,000 gun-related homicides in 2008. The murder rate in England is about one third the US. Guns are very tightly controlled, so the weapon of choice is different. Robbery and assault are at a higher rate than the US. Remove the drug war shootings, and our rate would plummet. New York has always had a higher murder rate, and had control a decade earlier than England. We are also a country that was settled by people with a more aggressive tendency. One third??? Can you do any math?? Okay, population wise, England and Wales, is ONE SIXTH of the U.S. In TWO years in the U.K. there were 39 deaths. In the U.S. there were 12,000 in ONE year. Now do tell how that math ratio comes out to 1/3....... |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| What the 'ell! | General | |||
| What the 'ell is goin' on in Connecticut? | General | |||
| W'ell all need thicker foul weather jackets | ASA | |||
| W'ell all need thicker foul weather jackets | ASA | |||
| O/T - US going to *ell in a handbasket! | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
