The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

@oralloy,

Quote:

The honorable soldiers are the ones who fight according to the Laws of War.

No massacring civilians, no rape and plunder, etc.

When they are advancing how do you tell one from another?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

It has nothing to do with fears of team members going on killing sprees. It has to do with one load of school-kids being offed by a madman being quite sufficient for our patience.

So once more if you grant Olympic team members and even those who are in the running, to be Olympic team members legal permission to have and practice with such weapons in the UK how the hell are you increasing the danger to school children????????

As some young men both born in and citizens of your nation had proven on your buses and subways you do not need firearms to do mass killings.

It would seems that irrational little old ladies of both sexes has taken control of your nation.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

... if you grant Olympic team members and even those who are in the running, to be Olympic team members legal permission to have and practice with such weapons in the UK ...

Glad, you wrote "if".
Because they certainly own their guns and practise. (You even can look up the schedule! [They are already training for the Commonwealth Games in Clay Target, Full Bore, Pistol, and Small Bore.])

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Glad, you wrote "if".
Because they certainly own their guns and practise. (You even can look up the schedule!)

Oh? and that why they been complaining for many years that they need to leave the UK in order to practice with those pistols!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So they are lying with the aid of the BBC and other British news outlets over their needs to travel outside the UK to practice!!!!!!!!!!

2 Replies

@BillRM,

I have no idea. Perhaps you do?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

We don't work like you think we do Bill.

I referred to the lady who led the campaign in more disparaging terms than you have at the time it was a hot issue. She wiped the floor with us. I think her success was due to people in high places seeing a chance, with emotions running so high, to get guns more under the control of responsible people whose backgrounds have been checked in detail and in the nicest possible way.

We don't have a politically effective gun lobby. Nor are we hamstrung with a written Constitution.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

So they are lying with the aid of the BBC and other British news outlets over their needs to travel outside the UK to practice!!!!!!!!!!

Not in any way that isn't generally accepted. Some of them must have found a loophole which banned them from practicing and thus allowed junkets abroad, with support staff, if you know what I mean, using lottery funds and government grants and sponsorship dough.

1 Reply

@spendius,

There are, according to a Sport England poll, 1m sport shooters in Britain, more than the number that play golf, rugby, cricket or squash.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Nor are we hamstrung with a written Constitution.

You used hamstrung and I would used protected by the Constitution.

Along with a fairly high percent of all adults in the US happen to be gun owners and see little benefits of disarming the solid citizens such as themselves while leaving the drugs gangs and other criminals fully arm.

The gun laws in Mexico are at least as strict as it is in the UK and that had hardly had have any impact on the criminals in Mexico.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

You used hamstrung and I would used protected by the Constitution.

But there is no need for Constitutional protection to keep your guns. You can choose to keep them.

If the Constitution has to be brought in on the side of keeping your guns because choosing to keep them is not guaranteed at the polling booths then there is an insecurity about your position which you have to clutch at the Constitution to disguise. A paralysis of democracy caused by a throwback to bygone times, which might be considered "pre-historic", and just the sort of thing you object to about Christianity,

That sounds profoundly unconstitutional to me.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Sorry the constitution is design to give the minority protections/rights from either the majority and or the government.

In theory the only means to take away those rights is to change the constitution.

0 Replies

@spendius,

I saw a recent poll of the citizenry of NY a few weeks ago.
It purported that about 25% of the populace was rabidly anti-gun,
about 35% was pro-freedom of self defense and the rest did not care.

NY is not much interested in personal freedom.
Still, everyone has his Constitutional rights,
e.g., the right to attend Church, even if he stays home.

David

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

We don't work like you think we do Bill.

I referred to the lady who led the campaign in more disparaging terms than you have at the time it was a hot issue. She wiped the floor with us. I think her success was due to people in high places seeing a chance, with emotions running so high, to get guns more under the control of responsible people whose backgrounds have been checked in detail and in the nicest possible way.

We don't have a politically effective gun lobby. Nor are we hamstrung with a written Constitution.

It sounds like u don t have a free country.

David

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

BillRM wrote:
They call a firearm two feet long a handgun!!!!!!!!!!

Here's a page on them:
http://www.lcbmarksmen.co.uk/LBR.htm

Note the metal thing permanently attached to the grip so as to ensure
that the gun complies with the 24 inch overall length requirement.

Even tho the weight (wate) has functional utility
in absorbing some of the recoil of a .44,
I still disfavor so awkward a gun; too long.

I prefer small framed, short barreled revovlers,
e.g. Taurus Model 445 calibrated in .44 special with a 2 inch barrel.

http://www.proguns.com/images/used-guns/usedguns247-904/278taurus445.jpg

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

You substantially misrepresented that poll, David, since the recent poll of NY residents dealt with the new NY gun control law and said:
34% thought the law went too far.
30% thought it DIDN'T GO FAR ENOUGH,
and 30% THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT RIGHT.
only 6% offered no opinion.

In other words, far fewer people were neutral than your figure, which was about 400% high, and 25% more than your figure wanted more control, which Scalia says is perfectly legal under the 2nd amendment. By almost two to one, NY residents opted for sanity rather than chaos. Good for NY. You were probably wise to move to Florida, where your chances of being gunned down by someone exercising his freedom to pack and shoot, like the asshole who was just convicted of three counts of manslaughter for shooting an unarmed kid who was playing music louder than the shooter liked, are much greater. You'd always better wear headphones if you take an iPad out, or someone's likely to shoot you over your choice of music. And keep one hand on your revolver at all times.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

more control, which Scalia says is perfectly legal under the 2nd amendment.

You substantially misrepresented what Justice Scalia said. He did not in any way suggest that unconstitutional measures are acceptable.

MontereyJack wrote:

By almost two to one, NY residents opted for sanity rather than chaos.

There is nothing sane about blatantly violating people's civil rights for no reason other than the pleasure of violating their rights.

There is nothing chaotic about the notion that it is wrong to violate people's civil rights.

MontereyJack wrote:

Good for NY.

People like you once cheered for slavery as well. America will defeat you in the end, just like we always do.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

When they are advancing how do you tell one from another?

Collateral damage is unfortunate, but it is allowed so long as it is not excessive.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

I can just see the reaction if I ever would show up at an American gun range with that whatever it is firearm.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Even tho the weight (wate) has functional utility
in absorbing some of the recoil of a .44,
I still disfavor so awkward a gun; too long.

Chambered for .44 magnum, such a gun might be interesting for defense against large bears.

1 Reply

oralloy says:

Quote:

People like you once cheered for slavery as well. America will defeat you in the end, just like we always do.

No, you idiot, people exactly like me opposed slavery. In faxt, people exactly like me (since one of them was in fact me), were the civil rights workers in the south before the civil rights act of 1965, working to bring segregation, the successor system to slavery, to an end. So I'll thank you to take your scurrilous suggestions and cram them up your ass.

1 Reply

orlly says:

Quote:

You substantially misrepresented what Justice Scalia said. He did not in any way suggest that unconstitutional measures are acceptable

You misrepresent what Scalia said, not me. He said that absolutists like you and the NRA are wrong. , that the 2nd amendment is not absolute and that reasonable regulation is perfectly acceptable and has always been so. I suggest you go back and read his majority opinion in Heller.

2 Replies

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know