Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Athens · Oct 22, 2005, 03:25 AM

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/10/21....ap/index.html

They would prob try and require a licence for coffee or ban it

Railroader · Oct 22, 2005, 04:38 AM

Don't you mean Canada. Or Australia?

Doofy · Oct 22, 2005, 06:05 AM

Yep, if that happened in England the bloke with the coffee would have been had for assault.

A bloke got arrested recently for punching two burglars who were trying to force their way into his house through the front door. While he was down at the police station being questioned, three of the burglars' mates came back and did the place over, requiring the wife and kids to make a run for it.

All this is a result of having a stupid commie government.

segovius · Oct 22, 2005, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

All this is a result of having a stupid commie government.

Or maybe of a sheep-like non-thinking populace who have begged to be brainwashed that black is white....

The UK is just a laughing stock now....left washed up on the shore of mediocrity with all the rest of the detritus of history.

Shame really.

Face Ache · Oct 22, 2005, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Don't you mean Canada. Or Australia?

In Australia we like punch-ups too much. Guns are for sissies.

Athens · Oct 22, 2005, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Don't you mean Canada. Or Australia?

No I ment england, remmeber they wanted to ban house hold knifes or something like that not to long ago.

Railroader · Oct 22, 2005, 11:38 AM

Canada is much further along than they are. Go buy a gun. Try it. We'll wait here.

Rolling Bones · Oct 22, 2005, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Canada is much further along than they are. Go buy a gun. Try it. We'll wait here.

They come from the US and are easy to get.

Mexican Americans bring 'em for a few pesos.

Doofy · Oct 22, 2005, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by segovius

Or maybe of a sheep-like non-thinking populace who have begged to be brainwashed that black is white....

The UK is just a laughing stock now....left washed up on the shore of mediocrity with all the rest of the detritus of history.

Shame really.

All true. And it's because of the commie government and commie idiots who voted them into power. They killed my country. I fully despair for my fellow countrymen.

Railroader · Oct 23, 2005, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

They come from the US and are easy to get.

Mexican Americans bring 'em for a few pesos.

C'mon tRolling Bones, you can do better than that.

Athens · Oct 23, 2005, 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Canada is much further along than they are. Go buy a gun. Try it. We'll wait here.

I have no criminal record, and nothing on my medical histroy to say im insane or unstable. I would be able to get a firearms licence with out any issues as long as I read the Canadian Firearm Safety Course (CFSC) manual and pass the test.

Railroader · Oct 23, 2005, 04:59 AM

From http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/info_for-r...s/owner_e.asp:

You need a valid firearms licence if you are in possession of a firearm, including a borrowed firearm, or if you wish to acquire firearms and ammunition by any means, including as a gift.

Exception: you do not need a licence to use a borrowed firearm if you remain under the direct and immediate supervision of a properly licensed adult aged 18 or older while you are in possession of the firearm.

Your licence must be valid for the class or classes of firearms in your possession. The three classes are:

non-restricted (ordinary rifles and shotguns);
restricted; and
prohibited

The Possession-Only Licence (POL) was only available to individuals who applied by January 1, 2001. It is no longer available to new applicants. However, if you already have a POL, you can renew it if you apply before it expires and have a firearm registered in your name. It is only valid for firearms that you owned on December 1, 1998. If you wish to obtain more firearms, you will need to obtain a Possession and Acquisition Licence after meeting the additional safety-training requirements.

christ · Oct 23, 2005, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

All true. And it's because of the commie government and commie idiots who voted them into power. They killed my country. I fully despair for my fellow countrymen.

You reckon Ian Duncan Smith would have been any different?

Unfortunately, the politics in the UK is a wash - no-one from either side is going to do anything other than go with the sheep.

... and I assume that you were one of the 'commie idiots' that voted? One of the problems with a democracy is that the person that gets voted in is elected.

segovius · Oct 23, 2005, 05:49 AM

Originally Posted by christ

You reckon Ian Duncan Smith would have been any different?

Unfortunately, the politics in the UK is a wash - no-one from either side is going to do anything other than go with the sheep.

... and I assume that you were one of the 'commie idiots' that voted? One of the problems with a democracy is that the person that gets voted in is elected.

If Blair and Labour are 'commies' then I'm a hardcore Republican gay-bashing Zionist Islamophobic Cliff Richard fan.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 05:53 AM

Originally Posted by christ

You reckon Ian Duncan Smith would have been any different?

No, I don't. Hague might have been different, but not IDS.

Originally Posted by christ

Unfortunately, the politics in the UK is a wash - no-one from either side is going to do anything other than go with the sheep.

Yep.

Athens · Oct 23, 2005, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by Railroader

From http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/info_for-r...s/owner_e.asp:

Sure leave out the rest

The Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL) is the only licence available to you unless you are renewing an existing, valid POL. To be eligible, you must meet specific safety-training requirements.

which is what I noted in the prev post. Nice try.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 06:05 AM

Originally Posted by segovius

If Blair and Labour are 'commies' then I'm a hardcore Republican gay-bashing Zionist Islamophobic Cliff Richard fan.

Pay attention.
Most of the cabinet were at some point actively involved in marxist or communist organisations.
Then there's certain giveaway clues which they're being really subtle about... ...like the slow removal of property rights, for example with "right to roam"* and the removal of trespassing laws**. It's very subtle but it's all there if you look in the right places.

Notes for US peeps:

* This government has introduced a people's "right to roam" over privately held property. Effectively this means that if you own land the government has given everyone in the country the right to walk over it. A famous case involved Madonna's property, in which the government gave people the right to walk over almost 80 acres of her estate, prompting paparazzi security fears. Other cases have involved numerous incidents where the public has been given the right to walk over farmers' land... ...at least two cases were as such: Government gives public right to walk over grazing land. Public does, leaves gate open. Livestock escapes onto road, causes accident. Farmer is sued for his livestock causing damage (even though the farmer didn't want the public on his land in the first place).

** Anyone could come and stand on my property (i.e. lawn, patio) right now and there is no legal means I can use to remove them. As such, the police will simply attempt to ask the "visitor" to leave but won't arrest if he refuses to do so.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 06:08 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

Sure leave out the rest

which is what I noted in the prev post. Nice try.

Hey Athens, nip down to your local gun dealer and try to buy one of these:

http://www.benelliusa.com/firearms/m4.tpl

You can't, because they're banned. They don't actually do anything which a non-banned gun will do, of course, but your government banned them because it didn't like the look of them.

Athens · Oct 23, 2005, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Hey Athens, nip down to your local gun dealer and try to buy one of these:

http://www.benelliusa.com/firearms/m4.tpl

You can't, because they're banned. They don't actually do anything which a non-banned gun will do, of course, but your government banned them because it didn't like the look of them.

And you don’t think the world laughs at America for allowing ridicules weapons to be sold to the general public. So what I cant buy that particular gun. Who cares. Guns are not a right, they are a privilege and not every one should be able to acquire them.

Face Ache · Oct 23, 2005, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Hey Athens, nip down to your local gun dealer and try to buy one of these:

http://www.benelliusa.com/firearms/m4.tpl

OMG ARE WE BEING INVADED?!?!

I'm gonna need a bazooka!

Originally Posted by Doofy

Anyone could come and stand on my property (i.e. lawn, patio) right now and there is no legal means I can use to remove them. As such, the police will simply attempt to ask the "visitor" to leave but won't arrest if he refuses to do so.

LANDMINES!

Or have the commie scum outlawed them too?

Pinko spoilsports!

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

And you don’t think the world laughs at America for allowing ridicules weapons to be sold to the general public. So what I cant buy that particular gun. Who cares.

The point is, that (Canadian illegal) gun will do no more damage to someone than a hunting (Canadian legal) shotgun. Your government have banned it simply because they don't like the look of it - Now that's a sign of a whacky bunch of lads running the show.

Originally Posted by Athens

Guns are not a right, they are a privilege and not every one should be able to acquire them.

The ability to protect yourself and your property is a basic human right. Well, not here obviously as it's getting to the point where we can't have kitchen knives in our kitchens, but in any civilised society it should be.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by Face Ache

OMG ARE WE BEING INVADED?!?!

I'm gonna need a bazooka!

LANDMINES!

Or have the commie scum outlawed them too?

Pinko spoilsports!

That was a little pointless.

Face Ache · Oct 23, 2005, 08:20 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

That was a little pointless.

At least I'm deliberately stupid.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by Face Ache

At least I'm deliberately stupid.

Your ignorance to the subtle clues is how things like the USSR and Nazi Germany happen. There's people getting killed on their own doorsteps here simply because the government won't allow them the means to protect themselves. They won't allow people the means to protect themselves because they believe that it's the state's job. That's taking power out of the hands of the people, which of course is the usual MO for commie states.

Athens · Oct 23, 2005, 08:49 AM

** Anyone could come and stand on my property (i.e. lawn, patio) right now and there is no legal means I can use to remove them. As such, the police will simply attempt to ask the "visitor" to leave but won't arrest if he refuses to do so.

I missed this, lucky for us the cops will arrest some one who refuses to leave a property and charge them with a crime.

Athens · Oct 23, 2005, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

The point is, that (Canadian illegal) gun will do no more damage to someone than a hunting (Canadian legal) shotgun. Your government have banned it simply because they don't like the look of it - Now that's a sign of a whacky bunch of lads running the show.

The ability to protect yourself and your property is a basic human right. Well, not here obviously as it's getting to the point where we can't have kitchen knives in our kitchens, but in any civilised society it should be.

Are you telling me the only way you can protect yourself and property is with a gun? What if I showed up to your door with a tank. Why cant you go buy a tank to protect your property. In civilized nations you don’t need a gun to protect yourself or property that is what law enforcement is for. Now in uncivilized nations where there is no law and order, a gun is only a first step.

Doofy · Oct 23, 2005, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

Are you telling me the only way you can protect yourself and property is with a gun?

If you're a 5'0" 60 year old woman who's having her house burgled by two 6'3" 20 year old blokes, yes.

Originally Posted by Athens

What if I showed up to your door with a tank.

You'd have a hard time getting into the house. My front door's not that wide.

Originally Posted by Athens

In civilized nations you don’t need a gun to protect yourself or property that is what law enforcement is for.

I once baby-sat for a friend. A neighbour's burglar alarm went off, so I phoned the police. Took them four hours to get there.

Athens · Oct 24, 2005, 01:24 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

If you're a 5'0" 60 year old woman who's having her house burgled by two 6'3" 20 year old blokes, yes.

You'd have a hard time getting into the house. My front door's not that wide.

I once baby-sat for a friend. A neighbour's burglar alarm went off, so I phoned the police. Took them four hours to get there.

I think the big problem is a society different which is why you think you need a gun and I know I dont need a gun. 4 hours, my god. I called the cops once cuz I thought I herd a gun shoot, I work DT btw, and the result, with in 2 minutes the first 3 cop cars reached the hotel, with in 6 minutes about 8 cop cars where driving around every ally, street around here. A knife fight broke out on the bus once, 3 cop cars got there within 3 minutes, and no one was hurt except for one of the guys fighting he had some slashes on his arm. I hate to think what would have happened if they both pull out guns instead. Owning a gun means **** unless you have it on you at all times and not just sitting in a house. Even if I had a gun and some one broke in to rob me, I say take what you want, he takes what he wants and I call the cops, I wouldnt bother pulling out a gun, I rather live then get shot. Sounds like you have a major issue with your local police. The only time the cops take hours to respond here is when its not a emergancy and its a busy night like fridays or saturdays.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

A knife fight broke out on the bus once, 3 cop cars got there within 3 minutes, and no one was hurt except for one of the guys fighting he had some slashes on his arm. I hate to think what would have happened if they both pull out guns instead. Owning a gun means **** unless you have it on you at all times and not just sitting in a house.

I don't like the idea of folks walking around outside their house with guns, but I reckon everyone should have the right to use one on their own property.

Originally Posted by Athens

Even if I had a gun and some one broke in to rob me, I say take what you want, he takes what he wants and I call the cops, I wouldnt bother pulling out a gun, I rather live then get shot.

What you need to understand is that the UK is quite a violent society underneath all that stiff upper lip stuff - this is why we breed soccer hooligans quite easily. A lot of times, a burglar will beat you half to death just for the fun of it.

Originally Posted by Athens

Sounds like you have a major issue with your local police.

Not just local - it's a national thing.

Athens · Oct 24, 2005, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

I don't like the idea of folks walking around outside their house with guns, but I reckon everyone should have the right to use one on their own property.

What you need to understand is that the UK is quite a violent society underneath all that stiff upper lip stuff - this is why we breed soccer hooligans quite easily. A lot of times, a burglar will beat you half to death just for the fun of it.

Not just local - it's a national thing.

If I lived in the UK, im sure I would want one too then. Where I live its different we arnt a violent society, hell most of the robberies that occur result with no one getting hurt at all, only a few cases ppl ever get hurt and its very very rare for some one to be killed. Most ppl that get shot for example are criminals being killed by other criminals. Canadians have the right to own guns, just takes a few steps to do it, and not every type of gun is allowed to be purchased.

vexborg · Oct 24, 2005, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

No I ment england, remmeber they wanted to ban house hold knifes or something like that not to long ago.

Well, thank god, I'm in Scotland, not England...

ghporter · Oct 24, 2005, 08:28 AM

Doofy, it's my impression that the British Government have tried to "take care" of everyone too much. By being so paternal, the government have taken over all the responsibilities of adulthood, relieving the citizenry of that level of responsibility-and making them almost more "subject" than they were under some of the more despotic kings. It's something I see happening in Canada and Australia too, and I hope their citizens day something about it before it's too late.

I for one do not need "taking care of" and most voting Americans seem to feel the same way. There is a big difference (in my mind anyway) between establishing economic safety nets and "taking care of" people. Nothing in FDR's programs went as far as what seems to be going on socially in the UK, and his administration was the most socialist-oriented in our history. Classing the entire population as being unable to be reasonably safe with a powerful tool (as in a firearm) because the government still can't pay enough attention to individuals to identify the nutcases and sickos is probably the worst thing the government could have done. I would be immensely insulted by such treatment.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Doofy, it's my impression that the British Government have tried to "take care" of everyone too much.

Spot on Glenn. That's exactly what's happening.
Trouble is, there's a very large portion of the population who are quite happy for this to happen.

Originally Posted by ghporter

There is a big difference (in my mind anyway) between establishing economic safety nets and "taking care of" people.

I completely agree. We should, of course, be taken care of to a certain degree (police, fire, ambulance services), but not at the expense of our ability to take care of ourselves (as is happening here).

moodymonster · Oct 24, 2005, 04:39 PM

you can use resonable force to get people off your property in the UK. Usually it is best to get the police to come and bear witness. They'll tell you to ask the people to move and put your hand on them. If the trepasser gets rowdy then the police handle it. (this is what the police told us) Provided you can wait for the police.

The cops tend to be immediately on your side where chavs are involved.

I've had quite a few stand-offs like this. Most not involving the police.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by moodymonster

you can use resonable force to get people off your property in the UK.

If they're not actually being a physical threat to you? i.e. just standing on your drive?

Originally Posted by moodymonster

Usually it is best to get the police to come and bear witness. They'll tell you to ask the people to move and put your hand on them.

? The police come and tell you to do their work for them?

Originally Posted by moodymonster

I've had quite a few stand-offs like this. Most not involving the police.

That sounds a bit dodgy dude, what with all the reports of deaths involving intruder vs homeowner.

goMac · Oct 24, 2005, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Your ignorance to the subtle clues is how things like the USSR and Nazi Germany happen. There's people getting killed on their own doorsteps here simply because the government won't allow them the means to protect themselves. They won't allow people the means to protect themselves because they believe that it's the state's job. That's taking power out of the hands of the people, which of course is the usual MO for commie states.

Uhhhhhh...

The Nazi government was ELECTED.

I don't think if every German had a gun back then it would matter. They wanted Hitler in. They didn't care when he took over.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Uhhhhhh...

The Nazi government was ELECTED.

I don't think if every German had a gun back then it would matter. They wanted Hitler in. They didn't care when he took over.

Blair was elected in the UK recently. Over 75% of the population didn't vote for him.

Not all the Germans voted for Hitler. If he hadn't have taken the guns off folks, there'd have been enough dissenters to make it a German civil war, not a World war.

Did you really just effectively say "all Germans were Nazis"? I think you did.

nonhuman · Oct 24, 2005, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

Uhhhhhh...

The Nazi government was ELECTED.

I don't think if every German had a gun back then it would matter. They wanted Hitler in. They didn't care when he took over.

I thought that was his point. Hitler took advantage of the fears and vulnerabilities of the German people to get himself into power. He played on their fears, exactly as our government is currently doing.

goMac · Oct 24, 2005, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

I thought that was his point. Hitler took advantage of the fears and vulnerabilities of the German people to get himself into power. He played on their fears, exactly as our government is currently doing.

I thought his point was more along the lines of if everyone had guns someone would have just shot Hitler.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

I thought that was his point.

Only partly. More to do with removing the possibility of resistance once the government has been voted into power (possibly by those very means - fear - that you've described). A large group of folks who don't agree with what you're doing is much easier to control if you've taken all their weapons off them. Even leaving weaponry out of the equation, the more a government makes it so that the population relies on them, the less easy it is for the people to rise against that government when it turns bad.

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Hitler took advantage of the fears and vulnerabilities of the German people to get himself into power. He played on their fears, exactly as our government is currently doing.

Valid point - although I think in the case of the US at the moment it's not actually the government who're doing the scaremongering - it's the government opposition, through suggestion. The government appear to be just getting on with the job without trying to scare folks.

goMac · Oct 24, 2005, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Blair was elected in the UK recently. Over 75% of the population didn't vote for him.

Not all the Germans voted for Hitler. If he hadn't have taken the guns off folks, there'd have been enough dissenters to make it a German civil war, not a World war.

Did you really just effectively say "all Germans were Nazis"? I think you did.

If seventy percent of people vote for someone, and the remaining thirty percent simply kill that candidate because they don't like him, that's not democracy, that's anarchy.

nonhuman · Oct 24, 2005, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by goMac

I thought his point was more along the lines of if everyone had guns someone would have just shot Hitler.

Hmm, could be. In that case I definitely agree with you though. An armed populace would have done nothing to prevent Hitler's rise to power and probably would have done little to bring him down either.

Not because all Germans are evil, but because Hitler was just that damned good at manipulating the masses.

nonhuman · Oct 24, 2005, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Valid point - although I think in the case of the US at the moment it's not actually the government who're doing the scaremongering - it's the government opposition, through suggestion. The government appear to be just getting on with the job without trying to scare folks.

Both sides are certainly doing it, but the Bush administration is no less guilty of it than anyone else.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Hmm, could be. In that case I definitely agree with you though. An armed populace would have done nothing to prevent Hitler's rise to power and probably would have done little to bring him down either.

An armed populace would do nothing to prevent someone from coming to power, but it'd make it very hard for the government to exert control on that population if they decided to go beyond the boundaries of human decency.

Originally Posted by nonhuman

If seventy percent of people vote for someone, and the remaining thirty percent simply kill that candidate because they don't like him, that's not democracy, that's anarchy.

We're not talking "because they didn't like him" though, are we? We're talking "because he and his cabinet turned into murdering monsters and broke most people's expectations of human decency".

Fact: the first thing all dictators do when they've gotten themselves into power is ban gun ownership in the general population, usually under the guise of "you don't need them anymore, we'll look after you" but usually for the reason of "the proles being armed may create problems later, let's disarm them".

Mastrap · Oct 24, 2005, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

All true. And it's because of the commie government and commie idiots who voted them into power. They killed my country. I fully despair for my fellow countrymen.

I lived in the UK under Thatcher. Oh boy.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

I lived in the UK under Thatcher. Oh boy.

I had a fantastic time under Thatcher. So did you if you remember clearly. If it was that bad you'd have just moved back home to Germany, surely? Strange how you stayed here under Thatcher but moved out under Blair, no?

moodymonster · Oct 24, 2005, 05:56 PM

You don't have license to beat someone up, but you can push them off your property. I used to work in a shop and would frequently have to tell chavs to leave. Almost every occasion they'd give front but would back down. The only time I felt that they wouldn't, I'd already called the police (record response time of about 1 min from the 999!) and they saw the blue lights and legged it.

If you think it could get physical, its best to call the police. That way they can bear witness to what happens. If someone is off your property you don't have grounds to persue them, but while they are there you can tell them to leave and stand in front of them - possibly pushing them back.

I tend to think of such encounters as to how its going to play back in court, while thinking in the back of my mind - one of these little bas7ards is gonna try and knife me.

The chavs in question are well known to the police but they can't do anything with them. Aside from choosing to pay house visits at 4am.

nonhuman · Oct 24, 2005, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

An armed populace would do nothing to prevent someone from coming to power, but it'd make it very hard for the government to exert control on that population if they decided to go beyond the boundaries of human decency.

You're assuming that 1) the average person knew everything that was going on, and 2) that the average person wasn't too swayed by the Nazi propaganda to want to fight back. I'd question both those assumptions.

And the second quote wasn't from me.

moodymonster · Oct 24, 2005, 06:03 PM

The bit about "putting your hand on them"

The police can't get involved unless its proved that the person is refusing to obey the law.

Wierdness - this hasn't happened where I've been involved but the coppers I've spoke to say they'd ask the shopkeeper to ask the person to leave and to direct them with their hands, including pushing them. If the person resists, the police take over.

Doofy · Oct 24, 2005, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by moodymonster

The only time I felt that they wouldn't, I'd already called the police (record response time of about 1 min from the 999!) and they saw the blue lights and legged it.

Wow. 1 minute? I guess that's a good thing about being in the Met area.

Originally Posted by moodymonster

If you think it could get physical, its best to call the police. That way they can bear witness to what happens. If someone is off your property you don't have grounds to persue them, but while they are there you can tell them to leave and stand in front of them - possibly pushing them back.

I tend to think of such encounters as to how its going to play back in court, while thinking in the back of my mind - one of these little bas7ards is gonna try and knife me.

I'm not overly worried for myself, "I'm all right jack", being behind security gates and far enough off the beaten track to not be bothered by intruders anyway. I worry about the general situation though.