Should the civilian population of all countries be disarmed?

[Rich]

I chuckled.

Is that all, waste of time

 

[Mike375]

An interesting point to note, in the case of higher caliber weapons (technically over here the only guns are the indirect fire ones, the rest are rifles, or pistols) specifically the 50 Cal, you do not have to hit the target to cause death. If the round comes within 1 foot (I believe) of the target, whatever part of the target is nearest is more than likely gone. To me, this means the purpose of the gun is to create an extremely high velocity round and the death of the person is a side effect. Much like a nail gun is great at nailing boards together - but accidently target a human in the head and they will more than likely die.

That is not correct. They all have "to hit" to do something. As to the 50 BMG (Browning Machine Gun) cartridge, it is a medium velocity cartridge with most loads having a muzzle velocity of around 2700 to 2800 feet per second.

All small arms military ammunition is loaded with full metal jacketed bullets and thais was to do with the Geneva Convention. Such bullets usually pass straight through doing a small amount of damage. However, at different times they might strike bone or just become unstable and then do considerable damage. Actually, for military purposes full metal jacketed projectiles are preferred because wounding a man is better and full metal jacketed projectiles usually have much better penetration. Thus they can travel through several people or through a tree to the man behind the tree.

For small arms the highest velocity cartridges are those that come as different hunting cartridges.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

A comment in passing: The reason that most manufacturers of small arms were not held responsible for deaths is, in summary:

1. Selling guns is legal because of the USA 2nd Amendment to the Constitution that makes owning guns legal. (Recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.)

2. When a gun is used for self-defense, its use is legal because we have the right to protect ourselves.

3. When a gun is used for illegal purposes, the question arises as to whether the gun's maker could have done anything different and still stayed in business. The issue became a matter of the gun retailers being the point that failed, not the manufacturer. Once the gun has been wholesaled or distributed to the end market, the manufacturer loses control over the fate of its product. Having lost that control, it becomes unreasonable to sue them for failing to assure proper control over their product.

4. When the gun kills via malfunction (i.e. it jams and the bullet explodes causing a lethal spray of shrapnel), I believe the gun maker can in that case be sued for making a defective weapon.

I think gun control is wrong. On the other hand, I have absolutely no problem with tacking an extra five or ten years for assault with a handgun as opposed to a lead pipe. In the USA, we use the theory of utility. It is possible to safely use or absolutely mis-use anything. The crime isn't in the thing, but in how it is used.

The problem with gun control is that as long as guns exist somewhere, criminals will get them. Don't deny it, because you know it is true. And guns WILL exist somewhere in this world. Don't deny that, either. So the question is do you take an irrational path (ban all guns) or do you just ramp up the punishment for using guns illegally? I vote for the latter.

 

[Mike375]

The problem with gun control is that as long as guns exist somewhere, criminals will get them.

The media hides that fact. In Australia you can do a drive by shooting with a military style semi auto and you would be lucky to make page 28 of the newspaper....the media were the ones that pushed for the gun laws. Of course such a drive by shooting is impossible since the guns concerned were in the "buy back". The other reason it won't get before page 28 is the shooters will have Arab or Asian names....and we already have massive problems with immigration and I am sure that is not restricted to Australia.

Don't deny it, because you know it is true. And guns WILL exist somewhere in this world. Don't deny that, either. So the question is do you take an irrational path (ban all guns) or do you just ramp up the punishment for using guns illegally? I vote for the latter.

Not possible. The world is now at the stage where it was America's fault that the japs bombed Pearl Harbour. Within 5 years Osama bin Laden will be seen as being in the right and America will be apologising and paying compensation for A Bombing the japs.

In Australia "the victim" is the person who does the crime. To do with his childhood etc and etc and etc.

 

[Brianwarnock]

and we already have massive problems with immigration

The Aborigines have thought that since the British landed at Botany Bay.

Brian

 

[Brianwarnock]

The problem with gun control is that as long as guns exist somewhere, criminals will get them.

How true Doc, I think that gun crime in the UK has increased since the knee jerk banning of all hand guns in the UK. We had another shooting in Liverpool last night, it was a targeted shooting but a bystander was hurt.

Brian

 

[Mike375]

The Aborigines have thought that since the British landed at Botany Bay.

Brian

There is a difference Brian.

There was no one among the aboriginals that was driving a big import of British people.

Post war immigration to Australia was UK, Italian and Greek and they were viewed as a minority who wanted to come to Australia and they adopted an Australianised anglo culture.

Today, the imports are not only a totally different culture but everyone is expected to change so as to meet their requirments. We have bullshit such as Happy Holidays etc as Merry Christmas, Happy Easter is a no no.

 

[Rich]

We have bullshit such as Happy Holidays etc as Merry Christmas, Happy Easter is a no no.

Thank christ for that, they're both pagan festivals anyway

 

[Rich]

How true Doc, I think that gun crime in the UK has increased since the knee jerk banning of all hand guns in the UK. We had another shooting in Liverpool last night, it was a targeted shooting but a bystander was hurt.

Brian

But to paraphrase an American response, it's gang culture and drugs that are causing it and not the general populace, which of course is totally different from the US

 

[Rabbie]

There is a difference Brian.

There was no one among the aboriginals that was driving a big import of British people.

Post war immigration to Australia was UK, Italian and Greek and they were viewed as a minority who wanted to come to Australia and they adopted an Australianised anglo culture.

Today, the imports are not only a totally different culture but everyone is expected to change so as to meet their requirments. We have bullshit such as Happy Holidays etc as Merry Christmas, Happy Easter is a no no.

Did anyone ask the aborigines what they thought of Australianised anglo culture? Did anyone even care what they thought?

I suspect they weren't over the moon about it.

 

[Mike375]

Did anyone ask the aborigines what they thought of Australianised anglo culture? Did anyone even care what they thought?

I suspect they weren't over the moon about it.

I wasn't around at that time but I suspect Rich was

 

[ColinEssex]

Today, the imports are not only a totally different culture but everyone is expected to change so as to meet their requirments. We have bullshit such as Happy Holidays etc as Merry Christmas, Happy Easter is a no no.

But isn't it better to have more choice about religion? Why be restricted to the brainwashing of the christian teachings.

Col

 

[Mike375]

But isn't it better to have more choice about religion? Why be restricted to the brainwashing of the christian teachings.

Col

I have no problem with that but I want Islamers to do what they want and the rest of us to do what we want. Merry Christmas is suppose to be offensive to the Islamers but the rest of us have to put up with their stuff.

In one area of Sydney which is heavily populated by Arabs, but not just Islamers, lot's of Christian Lebos, the local McDonalds can't have or serve any foods with bacon.

 

[Rich]

the local McDonalds

Only idiots and kids eat their crap anyway

 

[Brianwarnock]

Only idiots and kids eat their crap anyway

That's not the point, they should be able to serve their crap to those who want to eat it. I might not often agree with Mike but I do on this.

Brian

 

[Rich]

I have no problem with that but I want Islamers to do what they want and the rest of us to do what we want. Merry Christmas is suppose to be offensive to the Islamers but the rest of us have to put up with their stuff.

Are the Arabs to blame for the increase of the number of poofters in your country too?

 

[Rich]

That's not the point, they should be able to serve their crap to those who want to eat it. I might not often agree with Mike but I do on this.

Brian

In that case shouldn't Rastas be able to openly smoke dope on the streets, society within the community decides what's acceptable, surely Bri?

 

[Brianwarnock]

In that case shouldn't Rastas be able to openly smoke dope on the streets, society within the community decides what's acceptable, surely Bri?

But not the minority as in this case apparently, unless we operate at street level.

Brian

 

[Len Boorman]

In this country we have English Law

That is the law and the only law recognised in this country. Or should be.

In Spain you have Spanish Law etc.......

If you do not like the law in a particular country then leave it.

In terms of customs.

We have English customs.
Immigrants may have their customs.

If English customs offend then leave.

If a person infringes the huiman rights of another person then the infringer forfeits all their human rights until whatever punishment imposed has been completed.

If you plead innocent and are found guilty then punishment increased by 50%.

I could be an unpopular (with some) leader of this country

Merry Christmas, Happy Easter, Good New New and any other english greetings to all my readers.

L

 

[Fifty2One]

WOW did you help draft the Hérouxville immigrant code of conduct?

In this country we have English Law

That is the law and the only law recognised in this country. Or should be.

In Spain you have Spanish Law etc.......

If you do not like the law in a particular country then leave it.

In terms of customs.

We have English customs.
Immigrants may have their customs.

If English customs offend then leave.

If a person infringes the huiman rights of another person then the infringer forfeits all their human rights until whatever punishment imposed has been completed.

If you plead innocent and are found guilty then punishment increased by 50%.

I could be an unpopular (with some) leader of this country

Merry Christmas, Happy Easter, Good New New and any other english greetings to all my readers.

L