Should the civilian population of all countries be disarmed?

[Rabbie]

As an immigrant you are a guest in that country and should respect the customs of that country. In return you should be treated as a guest and not insulted.

If you do not keep the rules/laws of the country you are in then leave or risk being thrown out. If you would be sent back to an oppressive country then you should think of that BEFORE breaking the law.

 

[Len Boorman]

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

Nah Made it up myself. Basic behavoir I believe.

If I go to my Son or Daughter's home I obey their house rules whatever they are.

When they come to my home they obey my rules.

It is not a problem if you are areasonable sort of person

L

 

[Rich]

Nah Made it up myself. Basic behavoir I believe.

If I go to my Son or Daughter's home I obey their house rules whatever they are.

When they come to my home they obey my rules.

It is not a problem if you are areasonable sort of person

L

But you're forgetting Bliar's nice little sideline income ie the human rights act. I mean if you throw the kids out for not following your rules Cheri will take you to court for violating their human rights

Get these twats out now before it's too late

 

[ASherbuck]

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.

At MCT I had the luxury of a combat instructor who was scout sniper. We got to see the pictures he had from the Iraq War, he claimed the round didn't hit, but there were video game style gibs everywhere. Also, we were classed on how you cannot shoot a 50 cal at a person who is not wearing personal protective equipment.

Of course, the work around to the protective gear issue is waiting for them to drinking from a canteen and then shooting at the canteen.

 

[voidcranium]

Ok I'll give you an opinion.

I wish we could all have guns. I wish we could buy them at Argos. I would love to get that overwhelming sense of happiness when a bullet I fire saps the life out of a living thing.

Who cares if it's someones daughter or son or father. I would love to shoot someone like they did or do in Dodge City.

Col

You sir are a sick man thinking that.

You definantly do not deserve to have a firearm thinking like that.

 

[ColinEssex]

You sir are a sick man thinking that.

You definantly do not deserve to have a firearm thinking like that.

Just being realistic.

Actually, it was a joke. Although it would be nice to know what sort of feeling one gets when one has just killed a deer with a rifle.

Col

 

[KenHigg]

... Although it would be nice to know what sort of feeling one gets when one has just killed a deer with a rifle.

Col

Come over during season and I'll take you to the hunting club and you can find out -

 

[ColinEssex]

Come over during season and I'll take you to the hunting club and you can find out -

That's ok thanks. If I did I would be spoilt for choice as to who / what to kill.

Col

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The way my Dad and my uncle taught me to shoot a handgun included this lesson.

1. When you are shooting target practise, it doesn't matter that you shoot. Aim and shoot when ready. Be sure of your target and background, and then shoot.

2. If you ever are faced with the need to shoot a person, the situation is very different. If you can't avoid taking the shot, take it. But avoid it as long as you can because you must be sure. You must be sure because once you make the shot you cannot take it back. The deciding moment is when you pull the gun from its holster or other concealment. If you take out the gun, you have to be ready to use it. Otherwise it was just for show. And that kind of show is neither safe nor respectful of others.

That lesson wasn't quite the same as a "Dodge City" mentality. I voted for Mr. Bush because I really didn't like the other candidates, but I must say that I believe he didn't get the same lesson I did about when to shoot. "W" was taught the first part of the lesson but it is harder to know from his actions whether he was taught that second part of the lesson.

 

[ColinEssex]

2. If you ever are faced with the need to shoot a person, the situation is very different. If you can't avoid taking the shot, take it. But avoid it as long as you can because you must be sure. You must be sure because once you make the shot you cannot take it back.

Is it necessary to shoot-to-kill? I've been assuming that is the case, although nobody has discussed which part of the body you would shoot if push came to shove. Maybe better to "kneecap" someone rather than shoot someone dead between the eyes.

Here's another question - What if there are two intruders? You go down armed with the gun and one is ransacking the place and the other one has a gun out ready for the homeowner to show up. What do you do?

All these so called "hard" Americans here would probobly run a mile.

Col

 

[statsman]

Several of my high school class became police officers. Most are now retired but one was killed in the line of duty.

In the "bad old days" they had a very simple philosophy.

If a criminal throws a punch, you take out your truncheon and beat the crap out of them (avoiding the head). The next officer having to deal with this idiot will probably have a lot less trouble from them.

If a criminal pulls a knife or a gun, you take out your gun and you kill them. If they have produced a weapon, it is because they plan on using it on you.

Shooting to wound looks great on paper and removed from the actual situation but the results are generally a dead or seriously injured cop.

BTW - body armour does not stop a knife.

 

[ASherbuck]

Several of my high school class became police officers. Most are now retired but one was killed in the line of duty.

In the "bad old days" they had a very simple philosophy.

If a criminal throws a punch, you take out your truncheon and beat the crap out of them (avoiding the head). The next officer having to deal with this idiot will probably have a lot less trouble from them.

If a criminal pulls a knife or a gun, you take out your gun and you kill them. If they have produced a weapon, it is because they plan on using it on you.

Shooting to wound looks great on paper and removed from the actual situation but the results are generally a dead or seriously injured cop.

BTW - body armour does not stop a knife.

Escalation of force.
Officer presence
Verbal Commands
Hand & Arm
Baton
Mace/Spray/Tazer/Nonlethals
Lethal Force

That's what I was taught as the militaries, the rule is you can only match what is thrown at you. Of course, not too many will be upset if you OC spray the SoB throwing punches at you. But if someone is yelling profanity or asking a politician questions and you tazer them you might be in trouble.

Also, we were taught there is no such thing as shooting to wound. But obviously the role of militar is not the same as the role of the police, although they are getting much closer.

Amen on the body armor and knives. The SAPI plates the American Military uses is good for 1 round as well. Get shot twice near or around the same spot and it's too bad. From what I understand they finally started issuing side SAPIs too, so your waist and ribcage gets covered (6 years later . . . )

 

[statsman]

The tazer - a weapon that fires electrically charged darts that can incapasitate an assaultive suspect was greatly welcomed by the police when it first came out since it gave the police a non-lethal alternative.
We now know that in certain situations, the tazer can be lethal. Especially for those with coronary problems and if the suspect is wet - which they usually are with perspiration if they've been involved in a fight or on a warm day.
When first issued, they were probably used too often. I know in Toronto they are only issued to sergeants and based on recent fatalities involving the Tazer may only be used in specific situations.

 

[ColinEssex]

If a criminal pulls a knife or a gun, you take out your gun and you kill them. If they have produced a weapon, it is because they plan on using it on you.

I'm afraid the majority of Americans here are prepared to murder the intruder whether they have a weapon or not (that's the impression they give anyway)

Ok, how about this.

The general opinion of Americans here is that they will at some point be confronted with an intruder - hence the lust to kill someone.
Why do you not have good home security? - Security lights, alarms etc etc.
It seems to me that the "fly screen" doors Americans have for keeping out flies and mozzies do not keep out intruders.

We have a 5 point locking deadlock front and back door, double glazed, also movement security lights (which cats set off all the time) plus a locked gate to the rear of our house and a double padlocked garage. The patio door also has a 5 point locking system. It's all quite normal practice.

Surely prevention is better than murder - unless you love killing things like some here do, and it's a good way to experience killing a human.

Col

 

[Mike375]

I'm afraid the majority of Americans here are prepared to murder the intruder whether they have a weapon or not (that's the impression they give anyway)

A soon as someone becomes an intruder he has lost all rights. The only restraint I would have is due to legal problems at my end.

If it was not for legal problems at my end then if he has no weapong, a sharp stick or a gun then he gets shot. It is that simple.

Why should I have to risk my life while deciding the aamount of rights he will have.

Ok, how about this.

We have a 5 point locking deadlock front and back door, double glazed, also movement security lights (which cats set off all the time) plus a locked gate to the rear of our house and a double padlocked garage. The patio door also has a 5 point locking system. It's all quite normal practice.

Surely prevention is better than murder - unless you love killing things like some here do, and it's a good way to experience killing a human.

Col

Not really. If a few more of these people got blasted then they might start to think it is a bad idea.

 

[statsman]

I'm afraid the majority of Americans here are prepared to murder the intruder whether they have a weapon or not (that's the impression they give anyway)

Ok, how about this.

The general opinion of Americans here is that they will at some point be confronted with an intruder - hence the lust to kill someone.
Why do you not have good home security? - Security lights, alarms etc etc.
It seems to me that the "fly screen" doors Americans have for keeping out flies and mozzies do not keep out intruders.

We have a 5 point locking deadlock front and back door, double glazed, also movement security lights (which cats set off all the time) plus a locked gate to the rear of our house and a double padlocked garage. The patio door also has a 5 point locking system. It's all quite normal practice.

Surely prevention is better than murder - unless you love killing things like some here do, and it's a good way to experience killing a human.

Col

Col old buddy
You have once more lapsed into putting your spin and your standards onto other people's actions.
If you had bothered to visit the country which you are constantly berating you would know that even in "good" neighbourhoods most people have security measures on their homes which put your 5 point lock to shame. I am constantly amazed at the bars on the windows of most American homes and businesses whenever I visit there.
Home security in the US is a contant growth industry.
Even with these extreme measures, people continue to break into others homes.
In most places in America, it is perfectly legal to shoot someone who has broken into your house. I will not take a position on the right/wrong of this issue, I will merely point out that guns are a part of the American culture and America is NOT the UK and Americans are not Brits. Each culture brings it's own baggage to the table.

 

[ColinEssex]

So if most American homes are done up like Fort Knox - how does an intruder manage to get in? It seems that with all the security you claim, it is still pretty easy to break in.

I suggest the US home security industry is a little lacking somewhere.

Col

 

[Rich]

Sounds like it's a lawless and dangerous place to live, no wonder other countries don't want their way of life

 

[ColinEssex]

Sounds like it's a lawless and dangerous place to live, no wonder other countries don't want their way of life

We know it's a lawless and dangerous place to live. 82 people on average are killed by the gun every day in the USA. Obviously that figure is much higher if you just look at college students and Amish communities.

Col

 

[statsman]

So if most American homes are done up like Fort Knox - how does an intruder manage to get in? It seems that with all the security you claim, it is still pretty easy to break in.

I suggest the US home security industry is a little lacking somewhere.

Col

The object of home security is not to keep people out. If they really want to get in they will.
The object is to make it so difficult to get in that the burglar will pick an easier target.