A handgun that folds up to look like a smartphone will be released later this year

[Puiu]

You just really needed an opportunity to run your mouth, now didn't you? First off, I'm 67 years old. That speaks to the fact if I were going to be a serial killer, I probably would have done so, gotten it over with, and retired to Boca Raton by now. (*)

And second, you seem to have as much to complain about with regard to the Upper Darby Police Chief as you do with me. I could provide with a phone number where he could be reached. Tell him he's insane. Tell him he's a potential serial killer. But a word to the wise, do it from you are now, under your bed sucking your thumb.

Would you like to go back to accusing me of stealing my copies of Windows, while you're there? (Or "while you're here", a semantic point).

As far as the mods defending me, I can't believe they let you come here and spout your bizarre ramblings either. So I guess we're both lucky.

(*) That process is known as "aging out". The reason I know that, is because I had a semester of "criminology", with the man, (rather "doctor"), who actually did write the course textbook on it.

67 and talking about killing others like it's the natural thing to do... you are a sad existence. what good is knowledge and life experience without wisdom? the children of america deserve better this this senseless violence.
"How well I have learned that there is no fence to sit on between heaven and hell. There is a deep, wide gulf, a chasm, and in that chasm is no place for any man." - Johnny Cash

 

[captaincranky]

67 and talking about killing others like it's the natural thing to do... you are a sad existence. what good is knowledge and life experience without wisdom? the children of america deserve better this this senseless violence.

The stark, bleak, cold hard facts of the matter are, I'm certainly not going to acquire that, "wisdom", by talking to the sad, sad, likes of you. (Don't get your hopes up, I have no intention of leaving either).

"How well I have learned that there is no fence to sit on between heaven and hell. There is a deep, wide gulf, a chasm, and in that chasm is no place for any man." - Johnny Cash

This should serve to illustrate that Johnny Cash, much like yourself, was full of s***:

"He said he was the only person ever sued by the government for starting a forest fire. Although Cash carefully cultivated a romantic outlaw image, he never served a prison sentence. Despite landing in jail seven times for misdemeanors, each stay lasted only a single night".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Cash

In fact that "chasm" of his, was likely full of it as well....

In fact, that's pretty much of what a songwriter's job consists of, writing bleak metaphors. This is so that that others will identify with them and their woes, /then rush out to buy their records. After which, they can sit around memorizing the lyrics, while trying to plagiarize and adapt them for their own ends. For example, coming to Techspot and boring the living crap out of me with them.

 

[Puiu]

The stark, bleak, cold hard facts of the matter are, I'm certainly not going to acquire that, "wisdom", by talking to the sad, sad, likes of you. (Don't get your hopes up, I have no intention of leaving either).

This should serve to illustrate that Johnny Cash, much like yourself, was full of s***:

"He said he was the only person ever sued by the government for starting a forest fire. Although Cash carefully cultivated a romantic outlaw image, he never served a prison sentence. Despite landing in jail seven times for misdemeanors, each stay lasted only a single night".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Cash

In fact that "chasm" of his, was likely full of it as well....

You don't even understand that quote at all and the fact that I used Jonny to show just how much wisdom he had at the end of his life compared to you.
I'm sorry but I can't believe that you are 67... you fail to understand simple things that most people learn by advancing through life. The way you talk reminds me of Trevor from GTA V. Let me guess... you are also voting for Trump. ^_^

 

[captaincranky]

You don't even understand that quote at all and the fact that I used Jonny to show just how much wisdom he had at the end of his life compared to you.
I'm sorry but I can't believe that you are 67... you fail to understand simple things that most people learn by advancing through life. The way you talk reminds me of Trevor from GTA V. Let me guess... you are also voting for Trump. ^_^

Get a life. That passage was far from abstract. Johnny Cash was full of s***. S*** which simple people could access and understand which caused simple, everyday people, to buy lots of his records.

Now you're coming here telling me who I'm going to be voting for? Do you think you can read minds all week, or just Saturday nights?

This is rich, I now have someone from one of the founding member states of the Warsaw Pact, telling me how I should vote in an upcoming American election.

"West Germany formally joined NATO on May 5, 1955, and the Warsaw Pact was signed less than two weeks later, on May 14. Joining the USSR in the alliance were Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), Hungary, Poland and Romania".

If you want "deep lyrics in music", fire up a copy of Emerson, Lake & Palmer's, "Brain salad surgery" or Al Stewart's, "Past, Present, & Future", not some country hack..

Here's piece entitled "Beside the Rio Grande", it has something to do with Easter. See if you can figure out what that might be.

It's even in a country/folk style, since you seem enamored with that genre.

BTW, is that the only way you're able to relate to people in "real cyber life", comparing them with someone you met with your face stuffed night & day in video game? Do you have "Trevor" all figured out? Will you be telling him who to vote for? Does Trevor seem like a real person? Does he piss you off too? If you've answered "yes" to any of the foregoing questions, you're at severe risk of developing a delusion disorder..(charitably assuming you don't already have one)

 

[Danieli]

Yet another way for terrorists to walk into crowded places uninterrupted . Yay !

 

[captaincranky]

Yet another way for terrorists to walk into crowded places uninterrupted . Yay !

Well, greed trumps common sense pretty much every time that card is played. I really think ATF should take whoever is building this crap to court, and try to get an injunction prohibiting them from selling it.

 

[hrowder]

For me, "civilisation", amounts to a squiggly red line. Now, if you're going to run your yap as much as Pu?? does about America, you have the correction coming, along with the rest of what I posted.

Geez, to be honest I just wanted to point out that the spelling was not strictly incorrect since so many Americans seem so culture blind to anything beyond the end of their own noses. I even attempted to do it with a tongue in cheek "don't shoot me" to try and keep it light.

Can I suggest you contact a physician and see about a prescription for a maximum safe dosage of happy pills and have a nice lie down in a quiet dark room. Breathe... nice deep relaxing breaths!

As to guns and America. Sure it may well be illegal guns that are used in many of the atrocities, but it's not like there is are factories making "legal" and "illegal" firearms (the ones where they file the serial numbers off in the production line). If they are less available/accessible in general I'm positive there would be a substantial reduction in the gun crime related figures.

For me, "civilisation", amounts to a squiggly red line. Now, if you're going to run your yap as much as Pu?? does about America, you have the correction coming, along with the rest of what I posted.

Geez, to be honest I just wanted to point out that the spelling was not strictly incorrect since so many Americans seem so culture blind to anything beyond the end of their own noses. I even attempted to do it with a tongue in cheek "don't shoot me" to try and keep it light.

Can I suggest you contact a physician and see about a prescription for a maximum safe dosage of happy pills and have a nice lie down in a quiet dark room. Breathe... nice deep relaxing breaths!

As to guns and America. Sure it may well be illegal guns that are used in many of the atrocities, but it's not like there is are factories making "legal" and "illegal" firearms (the ones where they file the serial numbers off in the production line). If they are less available/accessible in general I'm positive there would be a substantial reduction in the gun crime related figures.

The problem is that "gun crime" related figures are only a small part of overall crime rates which go up when guns are taken from the hands of the law abiding. Even in London, which has forbidden keeping arms in the home or on one's person, the overall crime rate is greater than that of New York City, which has less guns than many other cities, but still enough to deter some thugs from trying to enter homes. Home invasion is up after guns were outlawed in the homes of the law abiding. This is true also in Australia, which famously went around collecting guns (and even killing some gun owners in the process... Like Crocodile Dundee). So saying "gun crime" is down when you go and collect all the guns is a very insane way to look at it. All other crimes are increased, even murders, but they aren't committed with guns. Other means are used. Guns empower the powerless, strengthen the weak, and protect the innocent many more times than they are used aggressively in the hands of thugs to further their ends. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the People from a possible "rogue government" which could never field enough soldiers to overcome an armed populace, as well as for personal protection or hunting. This is supposed to be a Government of, by, and for the People. This requires an armed populace. The reasoning is clearly stated in the "Federalist Papers" which are an explanation by the Founding Fathers about what they intended when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is an interesting read for those of you who are politically aware, and should be required for anyone who cares to debate about "gun control" or other Constitutional issues. Many Federal judges seem to have entirely neglected reading the Federalist Papers, much to the detriment of our society here in the USA.

 

[captaincranky]

The problem is that "gun crime" related figures are only a small part of overall crime rates which go up when guns are taken from the hands of the law abiding. Even in London, which has forbidden keeping arms in the home or on one's person, the overall crime rate is greater than that of New York City, which has less guns than many other cities, but still enough to deter some thugs from trying to enter homes. Home invasion is up after guns were outlawed in the homes of the law abiding. This is true also in Australia, which famously went around collecting guns (and even killing some gun owners in the process... Like Crocodile Dundee). So saying "gun crime" is down when you go and collect all the guns is a very insane way to look at it. All other crimes are increased, even murders, but they aren't committed with guns. Other means are used. Guns empower the powerless, strengthen the weak, and protect the innocent many more times than they are used aggressively in the hands of thugs to further their ends. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the People from a possible "rogue government" which could never field enough soldiers to overcome an armed populace, as well as for personal protection or hunting. This is supposed to be a Government of, by, and for the People. This requires an armed populace. The reasoning is clearly stated in the "Federalist Papers" which are an explanation by the Founding Fathers about what they intended when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is an interesting read for those of you who are politically aware, and should be required for anyone who cares to debate about "gun control" or other Constitutional issues. Many Federal judges seem to have entirely neglected reading the Federalist Papers, much to the detriment of our society here in the USA.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Although, I almost can't believe I'm willing to admit to that...(y)

Generally speaking, when a new government takes over, (oftentimes by revolution), the first priority in restoring order, is to outlaw revolting against that government...A duplicitous, hypocritical, dictatorial, and oppressive course of action in it's "best light".

And what better way to implement that, than to disarm all the civilians, ASAP.

I didn't read the Federalist Papers, but I have read the Constitution itself. As a standalone document it primarily contains a template for establishing a government, and concedes nothing to an individual's place or rights within that framework. So, without the Bill of Rights, George Washington could have slapped on a red coat and just about proclaimed himself "King of the United States", assuming his loyal troops would have backed him up on that.

Hence, a few forward thinking members of the continental congress simply refused to sign it, until that bill of rights was inserted.

I find incomprehensible, the amount of fear, laziness, stupidity, and dependency on all things technological, which exists in the populace today. If the internet or cell phone service should go down, civilization, along with anyone's chance at personal happiness is perceived as doomed. They really can't think beyond the propaganda they've been raised with and force fed.. :shrug:

When it comes down to it, allowing law enforcement to have all the firearms, while you cower in the back of your driverless car so you don't get hurt trying to drive, is nothing, if not totally pathetic. You're practically begging to have power corrupt the individuals you're stupid enough to put all your faith in. Even with good police officers, stalwart and true, the average lag between a completely panicked, wildly hysterical emergency call, and response to location by the best police forces, is about 2 minutes. They get there just in time to write, "caller was dead at the scene",. and put in a quick call to the coroner's office

Besides, we're from good hardy criminal stock anyway. No reason to try disarm us if not for your own designs on absolute power. The reason we're here in the US, is because we were sick, sore, and tired, of genuflecting to a bunch of watery blooded, inbred, murderous, mentally defective pieces of s*** , with paranoid delusions of godhood, which is basically all that much of English royalty amounted to.

 

[Debbz]

Now people will be talking loudly into on the bus/train. If this gets popular some shady cops will use it as a excuse to shoot people on their cell phone.

I am ever so reticent to point this out, but the more legislation you enact, the more laws will be broken. The UK can do so with the best of the 1st world countries. So, if you "want" higher crime statistics, simply lower the bar as to what constitutes "crime".

Exactly my counterpoint to what Davis was saying, because of the differences of what constitutes "crime" in different places in the world it's pretty hard to make any accurate comparisons regarding "violent" crime.

Fixed that for ya.(y)

That being said, the US has also drastically lowered the bar as to what constitutes crime. Other countries have as well, For example, "honor killings" are now"illegal" in Turkey, and the caste system is "illegal" in India.....

Other than that, I think you two might be on a mutually misunderstood syntactic rampage. Perhaps it's what we discussed earlier about the subtle dialectic difference between the queen's English, and our "colonist's" version of it.

To go briefly back to topic,(*) I sincerely hope ATF puts the big kibosh on this, "my cellphone is a gun", nonsense. Because if this lame idea is allowed to go forward, anyone, with any phone, will be able to rob the corner bodega at "gunpoint" whenever and wherever they so desire.

(*) WTF for, I haven't the foggiest idea.

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with your statement, people do and will continue to rob stores etc, but I'm pretty sure they'd think twice if they knew that the store owner was allowed to protect themselves.

I personally think that if someone wishes to carry a gun for the perpose of protection then they should have that right to do so as long as it's done within the laws, but before they do that the 1st thing they need to take into consideration is that should they have too could they actually pull that trigger, because if they can't then it will be taken from them and turned on them, that's the first thing and secondly get some training in how to use it correctly.

And yes, I do carry a gun, I carry it for protection and before you jump on that high horse of yours hear me out.
A few years ago I was in my office making up wages, my daughter had stopped after school so she could get a lift home with me and just seconds after she'd sat down, my office door was kicked in and I was being robbed, but it didn't end there and I'm not going to give any details other than because I tried to help my daughter not only was I shoot, but one of the men held the gun to my daughters head and said if I moved she would die so I had to lay there hoping the police would come before they killed us.....whilst listening to my daughter's screams ......until they left.

Now this is something we both have to live with on a daily base and I am sure as hell not going to have someone like you and the others tell me that I can't carry a gun or call me stupid for wanting to protect my daughter and me or anyone else for that matter.

Now if you don't mind could I just ask you a question?
Let's just say that for whatever reason someone is holding a gun to your head and I'm there with you, you know that you are going to die unless the police get there in time, now we all know the police are never on time and even if they did get there in time, usually their presents would normally make things worse.... But, then you notice that I have a gun..... Seriously, what would you prefer, that I do something to help you or just stand there and watch you die, which would it be?

 

[captaincranky]

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with your statement, people do and will continue to rob stores etc, but I'm pretty sure they'd think twice if they knew that the store owner was allowed to protect themselves.

Dudette, why are you quoting me? I've championed the right for citizens to bear arms since day 1, post 1, of this thread, and have listened to a ton of crap for doing so.

Just because I think a gun disguised as a cell phone is the worst idea ever, doesn't mean I want law abiding civilians disarmed. Quite the contrary. If this product is released, John & Jane Q. Public will have to sit around studying cell phones, brand by brand, model by model, to try and be ready for what might happen, when the next shady character walks into their store, "sporting a phone".. Not to mention, if someone already has a gun on you, what earthly good is a piece of crap you have to stand there and screw around with entering passwords. People are monumentally stupid beyond all reason these days. They'll buy anything as long it has "computer" in the product description. Wanna sell a stinking electric can opener, just make sure it's, "WIFI enabled". That way, you'll be able to drive your car down the freeway at 70+ MPH, while you call your can opener from your cell phone, and your dinner will be ready for you, the minute you get out of the hospital

Hell, in my neighborhood, a "long since moved to greener pastures store owner", used to strap on a 9 mil Glock right out in the open. It never bothered me a bit, as I wasn't there to rob him, simply buying a sandwich for lunch...In fact, the man had to close his store on Halloween, because his next "trick or treater", oftentimes was 6+ feet tall, wearing a ski mask...

 

[Squid Surprise]

"Crime rate" is a meaningless statistic unless you understand what the crimes are.... Yes, London's crime rate might be higher than NYC - but how many of them are SERIOUS violent crimes?

When a madman goes on a spree in the US, they have access to firearms most likely, so killing occurs - you get incidents like Wako, Columbine, etc.... In a nation where guns are limited, the killing spree turns into a stabbing spree, or punching spree. No one dies - or maybe 1 or 2 die instead of dozens...

Yet the "crime rate" will be the same... where would you rather be though?

And as for the "store owner's carrying guns to protect their goods" nonsense - people now arm stores with guns because of that... in other countries, you can rob a store with a knife - or even a baseball bat... no one dies...

 

[cliffordcooley]

Gun rights is irrelevant. We either have rights or we do not. And of those that do have the right to carry, this is still a ridiculous purchase. I can't imagine the discomfort this gun must have from recoil, and don't want to find out. If I'm going to carry, I want something that is not going to rip through my hand or break a finger.

 

[Debbz]

"Crime rate" is a meaningless statistic unless you understand what the crimes are.... Yes, London's crime rate might be higher than NYC - but how many of them are SERIOUS violent crimes?

When a madman goes on a spree in the US, they have access to firearms most likely, so killing occurs - you get incidents like Wako, Columbine, etc.... In a nation where guns are limited, the killing spree turns into a stabbing spree, or punching spree. No one dies - or maybe 1 or 2 die instead of dozens...

Yet the "crime rate" will be the same... where would you rather be though?

And as for the "store owner's carrying guns to protect their goods" nonsense - people now arm stores with guns because of that... in other countries, you can rob a store with a knife - or even a baseball bat... no one dies...

 

[Debbz]

I think you should have read my whole post before you made that comment about I need to understand what crime is!
I think, NO I am pretty sure that I have more of an idea about what crime is then you ever will.
I live in a country where it is said to be the most beautiful and safest place to be where it is against the law to carry a gun on you not even our police officers can carry one which I truly believe is pathetic when you consider some of the situation that they have to face.
I break the law every day and will continue to break it till the day that I die because I will never let what happened to my 8yr old daughter at the time and myself ever happen again and I'm sorry that you disagree and I truly hope that you never have the unfortunate luck of in during what we did but I am pretty sure that if you did you would not be saying what you've just said.
So do I understand what crime really is.......The answer is yes- DO YOU?

 

[captaincranky]

I think you should have read my whole post before you made that comment about I need to understand what crime is!
I think, NO I am pretty sure that I have more of an idea about what crime is then you ever will.
I live in a country where it is said to be the most beautiful and safest place to be where it is against the law to carry a gun on you not even our police officers can carry one which I truly believe is pathetic when you consider some of the situation that they have to face.
I break the law every day and will continue to break it till the day that I die because I will never let what happened to my 8yr old daughter at the time and myself ever happen again and I'm sorry that you disagree and I truly hope that you never have the unfortunate luck of in during what we did but I am pretty sure that if you did you would not be saying what you've just said.
So do I understand what crime really is.......The answer is yes- DO YOU?

That particular member is living under the delusion that, "a baseball bat is not a lethal weapon". Which is actually one of the stupidest things to come out of this thread. The next time you hear some 90 pound, 80 year old Chinese storekeeper slammed over the head with a bat by some 275 pound 6'6''tall wild animal during a robbery, it will most likely be in her obituary.

Killing with a knife, no problem. Just go in low, and slash the femoral artery.

 

[Arris]

As Squid says, we all hear about the stabbing sprees all the time don't we? The difference is that it's harder to kill multiple people than with a gun. Sure, allow handguns for protection, but why do people in their homes require shotguns and assault rifles and 1000+ rounds of ammunition. I agree with what others say, a clean sweep of guns in America is a very unrealistic suggestion for a solution but tighter controls on types and amounts of weaponry can't be a bad thing can it?

 

[Arris]

I am sure as hell not going to have someone like you and the others tell me that I can't carry a gun or call me stupid for wanting to protect my daughter and me or anyone else for that matter.

If this is aimed at me, then what the hell do you mean by "someone like me"???? Such aggression for someone who has only just joined this tech community and I haven't called anyone stupid. I've called the allowing for such widespread ownership of firearms stupid. Both sides of this are are allowed an opinion and obviously opinion is shaped by experience, but starting out with "someone like you" when its an anonymous person you know nothing about after your 3 contributions to our community is not something I can really take seriously, You know nothing about me. For all you know I could have suffered worse crimes than you have, and I'm sorry to hear about the ones you have been a victim of.

Now if you don't mind could I just ask you a question?
Let's just say that for whatever reason someone is holding a gun to your head and I'm there with you, you know that you are going to die unless the police get there in time, now we all know the police are never on time and even if they did get there in time, usually their presents would normally make things worse.... But, then you notice that I have a gun..... Seriously, what would you prefer, that I do something to help you or just stand there and watch you die, which would it be?

Ideally I'd rather neither of you have a gun. Unless you are an expert marksman/woman in that situation with the person holding a gun to my head, I.e. close proximity to me, you could shoot me instead of the gunman. Now I can't state that you aren't an expert marksperson as I DON'T KNOW YOU so can't say "someone like you".

 

[captaincranky]

As Squid says, we all hear about the stabbing sprees all the time don't we? The difference is that it's harder to kill multiple people than with a gun. Sure, allow handguns for protection, but why do people in their homes require shotguns and assault rifles and 1000+ rounds of ammunition. I agree with what others say, a clean sweep of guns in America is a very unrealistic suggestion for a solution but tighter controls on types and amounts of weaponry can't be a bad thing can it?

I have a super idea. Read these two things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban <<< >>> https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text and then go back to watching the news as to whether the queen, bonny prince Whomever, or the new babies farted.

The British are starting to remind me of the pope. When left with no armies or power, the pope decided he was going to keep the pagans in check and those tithes coming in with nothing but fear of god. And so you kowtow in fear of the queen. And we're supposed to kowtow to your worthless opinions

All these gun stories you've managed 'to collect and whimper along with, aren't a tenth of the brutal killing, maiming and butchering which goes on in the world. Here's a question, "how many Columbines does it take to make a Brussels bombing? Maybe we should outlaw nais, bolts, & screws too.

Since you're in Britain, and Squid is in Canada, I find it amazing that neither you simply aren't capable of shutting up about it either. That's a habit that goes back hundreds of years with you Brits, so I guess it's to be expected.

When it comes right down to it, if we weren't such an uncivilized, unruly, violent wolf pack, you people would be speaking German. And if it weren't for the umbrella of NATO, Canada might be hiding under mother Russia's skirts, and we could have moved the Cuban missile crisis up there.

I'm from the hip generation, and we used to preach all this love, peace, brotherhood, and non violence balderdash. We were wrong about so much. Equal rights being given without any compensation in return such as responsibility to country, and a ton of other massive faux pas, such as an all volunteer army, no abortions given to women on welfare, "because god doesn't want them to have them". Blech..

The only thing that turned out being worthwhile from that era, ( to me anyway), was at least a decade of constant and amazing gratuitous sexual encounters, with a seemingly unending stream of gorgeous hippy chicks. Oh, and and an endless supply of top notch progressive rock. Much preferable to disco, punk and certainly rap.

So, feel free to jump back under your covers, put your thumbs back in your mouths, and try reading about assault weapons bans in the US, before you summarily declare we don't have one.

Oh, and our shotguns are for deer and duck. Do you have a problem with that as well?

Before I go, I'd like to make a suggestion:

Besides, we're from good hardy criminal stock anyway. No reason to try disarm us if not for your own designs on absolute power. The reason we're here in the US, is because we were sick, sore, and tired, of genuflecting to a bunch of watery blooded, inbred, murderous, mentally defective pieces of s*** , with paranoid delusions of godhood, which is basically all that much of English royalty amounted to.

Why don't you throw out the queen with the gun oil?

At this point, I'm sure we'd be happy to lend you Obama until you can draft a constitution and get back on your feet..(y)

 

[Arris]

I have a super idea. Read these two things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban <<< >>> https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Ok, sorry I got something wrong although the definition of "assault" weapon itself differs per state according to that information. I apologise for my error. Although other wiki info shows that it's not US wide : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state

And reading that it seems that a US bill against assault weapons since the last expired in 1994 still hasn't been passed. It's come down to local legislation.

and then go back to watching the news as to whether the queen, bonny prince Whomever, or the new babies farted.

I'll do that and you just keep on being the pleasant individual that you seem intent on being.
I'll leave this "discussion" which I no longer consider as being anyway worthwhile, I'm sorry for those who have actually tried to contribute to civil discussion, as it has been dragged down to simply deriding nationalities and attacks on individuals.

The British are starting to remind me of the pope. When left with no armies or power, the pope decided he was going to keep the pagans in check and those tithes coming in with nothing but fear of god. And so you kowtow in fear of the queen. And we're supposed to kowtow to your worthless opinions

I don't know if "you" is directed at myself, but I'm Scottish and personally couldn't give two hoots about the queen. No one "fears" the queen, if you actual look into what power the British Monarchy have over their subjects it mostly a symbolic role nowadays.You pull me up on posting something erroneous and then spew out rubbish like that yourself? Good job.

Since you're in Britain, and Squid is in Canada, I find it amazing that neither you simply aren't capable of shutting up about it either. That's a habit that goes back hundreds of years with you Brits, so I guess it's to be expected.

What the hell does this have to do with the topic or guns? Seems you are the one that spews forth pointless contributions (up to an amazing 12k posts) and is incapable of shutting up.

When it comes right down to it, if we weren't such an uncivilized, unruly, violent wolf pack, you people would be speaking German. And if it weren't for the umbrella of NATO, Canada might be hiding under mother Russia's skirts, and we could have moved the Cuban missile crisis up there.

Again what the hell does that have to do with anything?

I'm from the hip generation, and we used to preach all this love, peace, brotherhood, and non violence balderdash. We were wrong about so much. Equal rights being given without any compensation such as responsibility to country, and a ton of other massive faux pas, such as an all volunteer army, no abortions given to women on welfare, "because god doesn't want them to have them". Blech..

I agree, there are many wrongs committed for the "good" of humanity. But again completely off topic.

So, feel free to jump back under your covers, put your thumbs back in your mouths, and try reading about assault weapons bans in the US, before you summarily declare we don't have one.

Wrong, I didn't declare you didn't have one (which you don't according to the info you posted, its down to each state and not an outright ban). I already admitted my error.

Before I go, I'd like to make a suggestion:
Why don't you throw out the queen with the gun oil?

Don't have any gun oil, but would happily be rid of the monarchy.
I'd like to make a suggestion but I'll refrain.

Goodbye.

 

[Arris]

If this is compared to a game of chess, you are biting the heads off of the pieces and spitting them at observers.

 

[captaincranky]

If this is compared to a game of chess, you are biting the heads off of the pieces and spitting them at observers.

Jeez, I should have thought of that tactic when I did play the game. Oh well, like the imitation German poster says, "ve get olt too soon, und schmart too late".

 

[RoosterFish2]

If you are going to quote something, include the whole quote for the context..

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

I'm no rhetoric expert, but that pretty much states that the right to bear arms is limited to the confines of a well-regulated militia, basically what we refer to as state/county/local police and national guard nowadays. Outside if a few nutballs with self-advertised misinterpretations of the second amendment, pretty much the entire legal world is in consensus on this one.

It's like global climate change but with guns -- no matter what the facts show, some refuse to believe it just in the interest of stifling progress.

If you are going to quote something, and lecture someone about not including the entire quote, don't leave out the comma's. If my English Comp professor is to be believed comma's are very important. Doubly so in a legal document. Let's look at the second amendment without bias real quick.

"A well balanced breakfast, being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed"

Who has the right to keep and eat food? The balanced breakfast? or the people?

 

[Larry Rosenberg]

Guns will always be an on-going discussion, (argument). I got to say this is cool! Yeah, I'm pro gun
but can understand others opinions. What I can't understand is how somone who doesn't like guns
but wants to control those that do! Then there are those that while they oppose guns own guns themselves!
The real issue with them is, it ok for them but not for me. Ha! Crap! I headrd someone say, what are you so afraid of? I answered, nothing! I carry a gun! Ha! Live with it! I don't hurt of threaten anyone that is not intent
on hurting me or a loved one.

 

[Squid Surprise]

What I can't understand is how somone who doesn't like guns
but wants to control those that do! Then there are those that while they oppose guns own guns themselves!
The real issue with them is, it ok for them but not for me. Ha! Crap! I headrd someone say, what are you so afraid of? I answered, nothing! I carry a gun! Ha! Live with it! I don't hurt of threaten anyone that is not intent
on hurting me or a loved one.

There are many people (me included) who want to control guns because their only purpose is to shoot (and kill) people... I kind of think that's a bad thing... I don't own a gun, never will... Think of a person you know with "average" intelligence.... now think about how dumb you think they are.... Now think that half the world is EVEN DUMBER than that person.... and he/she is entitled to own a gun!!

Do you "feel safer" with a gun? Probably... maybe you should read this then...
http://www.ceasefireusa.org/blog-entry/health-risk-gun-home-outweighs-benefit

Research shows that you aren't...

 

[Reachable]

I don't think there has ever been anything so fearful/cowardly in all of history as celebrated as gun ownership.

OK, cops are valiant, because they deliberately put themselves into danger all day long, ostensibly to protect others. But as far as the average person crowing loudly that they carry a gun because they feel safer, they're just advertising their fearfulness. Yes, there are some people, unfortunately, who might need a gun for protection, such as effeminate gay men and other minorities who might get picked on by various self-loathing morons. But if you're an 'average guy' what the hell do you need a gun for? It won't make you any safer. If someone sticks a gun in your back to rob you and you start to reach for your gun, you're gone. If burglars break into your house at night and you grab your gun, the burglars will shoot you before you're half way down the stairs.

With a gun in your house you can accidentally blow your brains out while cleaning it; your kids can get at it and kill themselves; you can suffer some small setback and deliberately kill yourself easily before you get a chance to calmly think about it. All these things happen alarmingly often.