View Full Version : Don't turn em in if you live in the UK
http://tinyurl.com/y9spuad
Good lord what's wrong with these people...
dirksterg30
11-18-09, 14:09
The ex-soldier, Clarke, was turning in a gun he found, so someone else wouldn't find it and misuse it. Five years in jail for that? Don't know what to say but :mad:
Here's the article:
Ex-soldier faces jail for handing in gun
Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 12:15
A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty".
Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.
The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.
In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested.
"I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."
The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.
In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.
"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.
"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."
Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.
Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours.
He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".
Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?"
To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."
Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.
Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.
But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun.
He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.
"You could be walking to a railway station on the way to work and find a firearm in a bin in the park.
"Is it unreasonable to take it to the police station?"
Paul Clarke will be sentenced on December 11.
Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge.
"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."
- Comments on this story have been disabled for legal reasons
The sun has indeed set on the British Empire.
What I want to know is how did it take a jury just 20 minutes to grant such a baseless conviction?
Complete and total insanity.
rubberneck
11-18-09, 15:41
message removed. God save the former British empire from the spineless cowards who run it.
That's the biggest sack of shiiit I've ever heard of! I'll tell you what if this country ever came to this...................whoa hold on, I was about to say that if this country ever came to this then I would have have given them the shotgun....shells first. Truthfully I wouldn't be alive or I would be n hiding if this country was even half as bad as it is over there.
That's the biggest sack of shiiit I've ever heard of! I'll tell you what if this country ever came to this...................whoa hold on, I was about to say that if this country ever came to this then I would have have given them the shotgun....shells first. Truthfully I wouldn't be alive or I would be n hiding if this country was even half as bad as it is over there.
We're probably about 50% there..
It's obvious what needs to be done, but are there enough people left there with a clue there to do it?
Why do I get that feeling that there is more to this? I know the UK is dicked up, but is it really that bad?
Business as usual in Londonistan...
Why do I get that feeling that there is more to this? I know the UK is dicked up, but is it really that bad?
Yes it really is that bad.
It only took 20 minutes to convict because they don't think like us. I dont' mean that necessarily as an insult but I guess it could be. We, as Americans, tend to be free thinking and rebellious. Most people I have known from Europe tend to see things as much more black and white. The government tells them something and there can be no exception, no question of it.
The law says you can not handle a firearm, he handled a firearm and was in violation of the law and was therefore convicted. There is no room for argument or question. Any single one of us would not see it that way, but many of them do.
The law says you can not handle a firearm, he handled a firearm and was in violation of the law and was therefore convicted. There is no room for argument or question. Any single one of us would not see it that way, but many of them do.
I simply can't believe this could ever be fact. I mean, they feed themselves, they go to work, they wipe their asses, they co-exist with society overall....
How can they be so hideously defunct in this one regard and still be functional?
Perhaps it is time they threw some tea into the harbor.
Why do I get that feeling that there is more to this? I know the UK is dicked up, but is it really that bad?
Yes, it's that dicked up. I've spent a fairly significant amount of time in Scotland, England, and Northern Ireland.
I'd move to Scotland in a heartbeat but for the ****ed up gun laws.
Perhaps it is time they threw some tea into the harbor.
July 4, 1999. Draperstown, Northern Ireland.
6 American students walked out with our breakfast tea and poured it at the base of the flag pole that was flying the Union Jack.
We didn't win many friends for that.
RogerinTPA
11-19-09, 08:19
This episode is as f---ked up as a soup sandwich. AFAIK, most western european countries have been collectively brain washed into this retarded thinking. Common sense has been regulated right down the toilet. Par for the course with decades of pacification.
dirksterg30
11-19-09, 08:48
Why do I get that feeling that there is more to this? I know the UK is dicked up, but is it really that bad?
Would you believe knife control? http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/science/27knife.html
British Medical Experts Campaign for Long, Pointy Knife Control
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
Published: May 27, 2005
Warning: Long, pointy knives may be hazardous to your health.
The authors of an editorial in the latest issue of the British Medical Journal have called for knife reform. The editorial, "Reducing knife crime: We need to ban the sale of long, pointed kitchen knives," notes that the knives are being used to stab people as well as roasts and the odd tin of Spam.
David Corio for The New York Times
Manufacturers are urged to redesign kitchen knives with rounded tips.
Full Text of the Editorial (BMJ.com)
The authors of the essay - Drs. Emma Hern, Will Glazebrook and Mike Beckett of the West Middlesex University Hospital in London - called for laws requiring knife manufacturers to redesign their wares with rounded, blunt tips.
The researchers noted that the rate of violent crime in Britain rose nearly 18 percent from 2003 to 2004, and that in the first two weeks of 2005, 15 killings and 16 nonfatal attacks involved stabbings. In an unusual move for a scholarly work, the researchers cited a January headline from The Daily Express, a London tabloid: "Britain is in the grip of knives terror - third of murder victims are now stabbed to death." Dr. Hern said that "we came up with the idea and tossed it into the pot" to get people talking about crime reduction. "Whether it's a sensible solution to this problem or not, I'm not sure."
In the United States, where people are more likely to debate gun control than knife control, partisans on both sides sounded amused. Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, asked, "Are they going to have everybody using plastic knives and forks and spoons in their own homes, like they do in airlines?"
Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports gun control, joked, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?" He said people in his movement were "envious" of England for having such problems. "In America, we can't even come to an agreement that guns are dangerous and we should make them safer," he said.
The authors of the editorial argued that the pointed tip is a vestigial feature from less mannered ages, when people used it to spear meat. They said that they interviewed 10 chefs in England, and that "none gave a reason why the long, pointed knife was essential," though short, pointed knives were useful.
An American chef, however, disagreed with the proposal. "This is yet another sign of the coming apocalypse," said Anthony Bourdain, the executive chef at Les Halles and the author of "Kitchen Confidential."
A knife, he said, is a beloved tool of the trade, and not a thing to be shaped by bureaucrats. A chef's relationship with his knives develops over decades of training and work, he said, adding, "Its weight, its shape - these are all extensions of our arms, and in many ways, our personalities."
He compared the editorial to efforts to ban unpasteurized cheese. "Where there is no risk," he said, "there is no pleasure."
Scouts banned from carrying knives - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6824181.ece
Scouts have been told to be slightly less prepared than usual. Penknives may have formed as much part of the scouting experience as badges and campfires, but according to advice from the Scout Association they must no longer be brought on camping trips, except when there is a “specific” need.
Modern Britain’s knife culture, including the rise in fatal stabbings, has been cited by troop leaders — although some have countered that the code contradicts the tradition that Scouts are to be trusted for their honour.
The advice, published in the official in-house magazine, Scouting, says that confusion over the legality of carrying a knife in public has made it necessary to revise the rules.
Dave Budd, who trains Scouts on the safe use of a knife, said that the rise in knife crime — up by 50 per cent in just one year — had made “clarification” of the guidance necessary.
He wrote: “Scouts often have the need for a good knife, and in the early days every Scout was actively encouraged to put a knife on their belt. Sadly, there is now confusion about when a Scout is allowed to carry a knife.
“The series of high-profile fatal stabbings highlighted a growing knife culture in the UK. I think it is safest to assume that knives of any sort should not be carried by anybody to a Scout meeting or camp, unless there is likely to be a specific need for one. In that case, they should be kept by the Scout leaders and handed out as required.”
The Scout Association has defended its position, arguing that even those who pledge to do their duty for God and country cannot be immune from Britain’s contemporary knife culture.
Under the Criminal Justice Act 1988, anyone can legally carry fold-up knives with blades that are shorter than three inches.
It is illegal to sell knives to anyone under 18 in England and Wales, and anyone under 16 in Scotland.
The Scout Association, which begins a new season with a recently crowned Chief Scout, Bear Grylls, has now supplemented that with its own advice. It includes recommendations that knives should be carried to and from meetings by an adult, and must not be carried around campsites, which are considered public places.
Scouts were at one point allowed to carry a sheath knife on their belt as part of their uniform, but in another change to the traditions originated by Lord Baden-Powell a century ago the advice also states that knives must not be worn with uniform, except for reasons of religion.
Sheila Burgin, a troop leader for Sevenoaks Scout Group in Kent, criticised the guidance. She said: “The Scout Association doesn’t want to be in trouble for encouraging people to carry knives, but I think it is very sad. It’s health and safety gone mad.
“Scouts by law are allowed to have Swiss army knives. I think this is going too far — you just don’t know when a Scout will need a knife.”
Ms Burgin also argued that the advice went against the spirit of the Scout code of honour.
“The first Scout Law is ‘The Scout is to be trusted,’ ” she said. “Scouts love having knives and using them properly. If you teach children to use a knife properly, they won’t abuse it. If someone wants to cause harm, they will do it anyway. It is a real shame it has come to this.”
However, a Scouts spokesman insisted that young people could still learn important skills without penknives. “The Scout Association plays a key role in helping young people develop the confidence, maturity and self-esteem they need to play active and responsible roles in their communities, and to resist the peer pressure that may attract them into local gang culture,” he said.
“We believe that young people need more places to go after school and at weekends, where they can experience adventure without the threat of violence or bullying and the need to carry weapons. Scouting helps to prepare young people with valuable life-skills, while keeping them safe by not carrying knives.”
Hunter Rose
11-19-09, 10:20
Can these people not understand that human beings are violent by nature?
Banning objects does nothing to change the nature of man. If you ban knives then they will see an increase in baseball, or I guess cricket, bat crimes. Ban the bats and you will see shovel crime skyrocket. Ban shovels and you will see a spike in telephone cord stranglings, etc., etc. The damn objects don't cause the act.
Asinine.
Take away the common sense verdict that should have been rendered here, it is the law itself as written on the books that is screwed up in this situation. My guess is the judge basically pointed out to the jury that they couldn't take into account his intent, leaving the sole question of whether he handled a firearm. No question that he did, and there's your verdict. Nonetheless, an unbelievably screwed up result. Hopefully there's some sort of pardon system available, and someone with the balls to actually use it. That law needs to be more clearly refined to deal with this sort of situation.
What the heck is a "knife culture"?
Or a "gun culture"?
These countries have a violent society because they allow it. These superficial measures encourage this sort of violent behavior because it pacifies and gives a false sense of "doing something" to the average person and is totally ignored by those prone to violence or criminal behavior.
I am well aware of the anti-knife legislation. I just find it absurd that a person turned in a firearm and was jailed.
July 4, 1999. Draperstown, Northern Ireland.
6 American students walked out with our breakfast tea and poured it at the base of the flag pole that was flying the Union Jack.
We didn't win many friends for that.
I was suggesting some English citizens might want to pour some tea. Not sure what the point of American students doing that was.
PRGGodfather
11-19-09, 12:01
This episode is as f---ked up as a soup sandwich. AFAIK, most western european countries have been collectively brain washed into this retarded thinking. Common sense has been regulated right down the toilet. Par for the course with decades of pacification.
So true. Of course, to say ALL Europeans is much too broad -- but I have noted a pattern with the overwhelming number of Europeans I have encountered of late.
Far too any Europeans, far too proud of their cosmopolitanism, have truly been brainwashed. They cannot judge even the simplest of acts. For every violent act committed by a criminal or terrorist, they search for facts to justify the crime or terror -- and blame the victim for inciting it. This justification is used for just about everything -- from child molest to Nazism, and jihadists to apologists. We want to sound so smart -- we can longer evaluate anything effectively.
At the end of the day, how can a compass work without absolute north? If it always points to us, can it be a surprise we cannot find our way? Does wishing everyone to be nice make them nice? To hear so many Europeans and "progressives" speak -- it is clear to me at least, that pussification has no bounds. We have lost the ability to act, and need permission from others to fight for what we know to be right.
And in our effort to be such sophisticated apologists, we, too, will lose our way.
And in our effort to be such sophisticated apologists, we, too, will lose our way.
That's why the term "Accountability" needs a resurgence.
And by the way, a few more public transportation bombings and the EU will quickly lose some of it's "cosmopolitanism". They are just asleep, although wondering when they will wake the fu*k up is becoming tedious.
Times like this I'm glad I'm not British anymore. I'll keep the accent, but they can keep everything else.
I think it's crazy the way the legal system interprets things in general.
To get off the subject for a sec, I was watching the news a few minutes ago and they had a story about a lady that in 1992 was attacked and stabbed, but she recovered. Now 17yrs later she dies, the M.E. attributes it to the old wound from 17yrs ago.....now that guy is being hunted and charged for murder.....after 17yrs of the person living?
I don't know about that.........
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/11/19/1119homicide.html
Freakin Austin., TX retard capital......
R.
PRGGodfather
11-19-09, 15:38
17 years may be the source of the drama, but simply -- if you used unlawful force on someone, which causes that person to die -- 17 seconds, hours, days or apparently, even years later -- you're still responsible for it, especially if it created a series of health problems and affected someone's quality of life. The 17 years may draw the attention, but the real issue is the unlawful force.
Don't stab anyone without justification and you don't have to worry about it.
Lawyers, by circumstance, must ponder ridiculous hypotheticals.
My favorite: If you push some out of a skyscraper, and on the way down, I shoot him as he passes my window -- who killed him? Legally, we both did, even if I would not have had a shot at him if you had not pushed him in the first place. Regardless of the facts, a good lawyer will be able to argue from either side of the debate -- so don't bother unless you have a lot of time or you enjoy that kind of stuff.
Lawyers rarely argue facts -- they argue their interpretation of the facts. That is why the best strategy is don't give them anything to interpret; although it will certainly not stop them from interfering in our lives in some fashion.
In this case, IMHO, we don't owe the guy who stabbed her a thing. Life is not a dress rehearsal, and sometimes, a mistake you make 17 years before can haunt you. It sucks, but that's why consciousness of decision is encouraged. I've never been accused of being particularly sensitive, but sympathy for the criminal doesn't work for me, at least. Like mentioned earlier, accountability is a fickle mistress, and she calls when she feels like it.
Maybe your post isn't as off-topic as originally believed...
Back to the original topic...
17 years may be the source of the drama, but simply -- if you used unlawful force on someone, which causes that person to die -- 17 seconds, hours, days or apparently, even years later -- you're still responsible for it, especially if it created a series of health problems and affected someone's quality of life. The 17 years may draw the attention, but the real issue is the unlawful force.
Don't stab anyone without justification and you don't have to worry about it.
Lawyers, by circumstance, must ponder ridiculous hypotheticals.
My favorite: If you push some out of a skyscraper, and on the way down, I shoot him as he passes my window -- who killed him? Legally, we both did, even if I would not have had a shot at him if you had not pushed him in the first place. Regardless of the facts, a good lawyer will be able to argue from either side of the debate -- so don't bother unless you have a lot of time or you enjoy that kind of stuff.
Lawyers rarely argue facts -- they argue their interpretation of the facts. That is why the best strategy is don't give them anything to interpret; although it will certainly not stop them from interfering in our lives in some fashion.
In this case, IMHO, we don't owe the guy who stabbed her a thing. Life is not a dress rehearsal, and sometimes, a mistake you make 17 years before can haunt you. It sucks, but that's why consciousness of decision is encouraged. I've never been accused of being particularly sensitive, but sympathy for the criminal doesn't work for me, at least. Like mentioned earlier, accountabiluty is a fickle mistress, and she calls when she feels like it.
Maybe your post isn't as off-topic as originally believed...
Back to the original topic...
Pretty much works for me.
Take away the common sense verdict that should have been rendered here, it is the law itself as written on the books that is screwed up in this situation. My guess is the judge basically pointed out to the jury that they couldn't take into account his intent, leaving the sole question of whether he handled a firearm. No question that he did, and there's your verdict. Nonetheless, an unbelievably screwed up result. Hopefully there's some sort of pardon system available, and someone with the balls to actually use it. That law needs to be more clearly refined to deal with this sort of situation.
I wonder if the English SUBJECTS on the jury ever heard of the concept "Jury Nullification." Oh well, it must just be another foreign subject.
They were like still pissed at him about this incident...
Man accused of attacking DVLA inspector with broom walks free
Monday, September 29, 2008, 17:27
A man accused of beating a DVLA inspector with a broom handle as walked free from court after claiming his alleged victim had exaggarated the incident.
Inspector Hayden Hart had claimed he was attakced my Paul Clarke, 26, as he patrolled Wood Street, Merstham, checking parked cars for out-of-date tax discs.
The inspector said he was clubbed repeatedly by his attacker, who warned him: "If you come near my vehicle again, I'll break your f****** legs."
But Mr Clarke, of Wood Street, Merstham, walked free from the Crown Court at Guildford after winning his appeal against conviction for assault by beating at Redhill Magistrates Court on March 12 this year.
Mr Clarke, 26, of Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, denied the offence, insisting he had never actually struck Mr Hart during the confrontation on June 12 last year (2007).
The court was told that Mr Hart was driving along Wood Street stopping to inspect parked vehicles to make sure that they were displaying valid vehicle excise licenses.
Giving evidence at the appeal hearing, Mr Hart said: "I had seen four vehicles which I was going to report for not having up-to-date tax discs."
He said he was inside his Honda filling out the appropriate forms when he heard a loud bang on his window and looked up to see a young man.
Mr Hart said: "He was carrying a broom stick without the head on the end of it."
He said the man appeared very aggressive and threatened violence against him.
"As I got out of my car to ask him what he was doing, he struck me on the arm two or three times with the handle," he said.
Mr Hart said he grabbed hold of the stick and there was a scuffle before the other man walked off.
He said he suffered extensive bruising on his arm and had to have time off work because he felt so shaken by the incident.
"I felt very depressed," he said.
However, under cross-examination by defence counsel Richard McConaghy, he admitted the bruises might have been caused when he had leapt out of his vehicle to see what was going on.
Mr Clarke said he had confronted Mr Hart because he thought he had seen him trying to steal something from his pick-up truck.
"I didn't realise he was a DVLA inspector. He might have been a prolific thief," he said.
He said he had the broom because he had been sweeping up some glass in the road - and the head, which was loose, had fallen off during the fracas.
Mr Clarke accused Mr Hart of exaggerating his injuries, adding: "I reckon he wanted some time off work and compensation."
After the court was told that it was not possible to prove that the bruising to Mr Hart's arm had actually been caused by Mr Clarke, prosecuting counsel Laurence Aiolfi applied to have the offence changed from assault by beating to one of common assault.
But the judge, Mr. Recorder Stuart Lawson-Rogers, refused to agree to this - allowing Mr Clarke's appeal to succeed.
Far too any Europeans, far too proud of their cosmopolitanism, have truly been brainwashed.
That's the crux of the problem in the UK - people there are all but completely absorbed about iPods, latest Burberry coat, and getting to the pub to revel in their own awesomenees, to be concerned about trivial matters like the freedom to own/carry tools to protect themselves from dying.
There are still pockets of Europe where common sense prevails in this area (Czech Republic, for example) but those are areas not used to freedom. They still understand its importance because most of the people alive there remember the bad old days. Give in another generation and some more European unification steps and they'll be goosestepping in line with the rest.
I simply can't believe this could ever be fact. I mean, they feed themselves, they go to work, they wipe their asses, they co-exist with society overall....
How can they be so hideously defunct in this one regard and still be functional?
Apparently you've never seen English tourists in Vegas.
We had a fight break out between 2 English guys in our line at the club on the weekend of a Ricky Hatton fight. After we break it up we find out the combatants are friends and are there together. The cause? One pissed on the other's leg. In line.
QuietShootr
11-20-09, 06:21
Yes, it really is that ****ed up. I know it's hard to believe if you haven't seen it, but it REALLY is that ****ed up.
Oddly enough, Northern Ireland isn't nearly as dicked up in that regard as Britain. You can get a CCW in NI, and ARs and such are legal. This is not true in the Republic of Ireland (the south).
I'm going back in February, and I am spending more time in NI. I liked it a lot better.
Gutshot John
11-20-09, 10:53
You get convicted for being a good citizen but if you strangle your wife in your "sleep" you walk out of jail.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/11/20/uk.crime.strangle/index.html
Oddly enough, Northern Ireland isn't nearly as dicked up in that regard as Britain. You can get a CCW in NI, and ARs and such are legal. This is not true in the Republic of Ireland (the south).
Northern Ireland, as in The Troubles, the IRA and all that? I'd like to know more about this.
I have spent all my life under a communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either. A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is taking very scarce advantage of the high level of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses.
And it will be simply impossible to stand through the trials of this threatening century with only the support of a legalistic structure.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html
I wonder if the English SUBJECTS on the jury ever heard of the concept "Jury Nullification." Oh well, it must just be another foreign subject.
English jurisprudence isn't my thing, but I seem to recall reading something, somewhere, that our concept of jury nullification had been rendered impossible there. Intentionally, too.
English jurisprudence isn't my thing, but I seem to recall reading something, somewhere, that our concept of jury nullification had been rendered impossible there. Intentionally, too.
Yep.
When we prosecuted the Nazis and Imperial Japanese in military tribunals for what our legal system does now days as standard practice it was referred to as crimes against humanity. If people knew that they didn't have to go along with the racket, there would be no racket. A jury of your peers ought to be 12 people picked out of the area phone book at random. That would basically end the governments war on freedom.
Hopefully we'll see a return to all forms of nullification in the future. I'd really like to see charges drummed up on bad actors in our legal system who prosecute innocent citizens on unconstitutional laws. They need to have the legal system come down on them like some overloaded costco shelving units.
I feel real bad for that guy in the UK, the country he believed in has show itself unworthy of his service.
QuietShootr
11-20-09, 23:22
Northern Ireland, as in The Troubles, the IRA and all that? I'd like to know more about this.
What do you want to know?
That's seriously effed up and in so many ways...
What do you want to know?
How is all that possible? I thought NI was still technically part of the UK. You would think with the past terrorist activity that they'd be even more restrictive.
QuietShootr
11-21-09, 21:24
How is all that possible? I thought NI was still technically part of the UK. You would think with the past terrorist activity that they'd be even more restrictive.
It is part of the UK, but they have home rule. It's very different from the south. The south is very EU-ish, the north still has a little Western U.S. '**** you' flavor to it. They still believe in self-defense up there.
In my opinion (this is going to bring some people out of the woodwork, I'm sure) the Irish with balls are all in the north. On both sides.
Oddly enough, Northern Ireland isn't nearly as dicked up in that regard as Britain. You can get a CCW in NI, and ARs and such are legal. This is not true in the Republic of Ireland (the south).
This is interesting, as I had heard they were tightening restrictions and trying to initiate various bans. I cannot find the exact article, but someone in the Irish government actually said they wanted to prevent the development of a "gun culture."
http://www.fieldandstream.com/pages/discussion-topic-ireland-eyes-gun-ban
"The Government has outlined its proposals for a ban on licensing handguns, which may be expanded to include all firearms in the future.
Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said the legislation, which will be published shortly as part of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous) Provisions Bill, had been drawn up in response to increasing concern over the proliferation of firearms. . . .
“My concern is that unless strong and decisive action is taken the number of handguns could grow exponentially and our firearms regime would equate to that of countries such as the United States,” Mr Ahern said."
QuietShootr
11-21-09, 23:23
This is interesting, as I had heard they were tightening restrictions and trying to initiate various bans. I cannot find the exact article, but someone in the Irish government actually said they wanted to prevent the development of a "gun culture."
http://www.fieldandstream.com/pages/discussion-topic-ireland-eyes-gun-ban
"The Government has outlined its proposals for a ban on licensing handguns, which may be expanded to include all firearms in the future.
Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said the legislation, which will be published shortly as part of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous) Provisions Bill, had been drawn up in response to increasing concern over the proliferation of firearms. . . .
“My concern is that unless strong and decisive action is taken the number of handguns could grow exponentially and our firearms regime would equate to that of countries such as the United States,” Mr Ahern said."
That's the Republic of Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
I simply can't believe this could ever be fact. I mean, they feed themselves, they go to work, they wipe their asses, they co-exist with society overall....
How can they be so hideously defunct in this one regard and still be functional?
They're not hideously defunct in that one regard, and calling them "functional" is a stretch.
This is the same society where, not too long ago, a couple of public servants - a sort of safety patrol - stood by and watched a kid drown in a pond because it was "against the rules" to attempt a swimming rescue.
This is the society that was recently talking about - and may in fact have done so, since - banning fire extinguishers in apartment buildings because they might encourage an untrained individual to fight a fire.
This is the society that let thousands of angry muslims wave around placards with explicit and graphic threats of violence on them, yet arrested a handful of people who showed up with free-speech themed signs because they might "incite violence".
This is the society where people complained that automated traffic cameras were racially profiling people .
This is the society that has created one of the most complete high-tech surveilance states in the history of the world.
This is the society that has put forward plans to put CCTV cameras inside the homes of 70k or so parents who have been deemed "delinquent" to ensure that the children are fed vegatables and go to bed on time.
This is the society with schools that have banned "sweets" in boxed lunches, fined parents for sending cookies in their children's lunches, and encouraged children to rat on other children.
I could go on all day. That nation is ****ED. It isn't just "that bad", it's worse.
Belmont31R
11-22-09, 23:23
They're not hideously defunct in that one regard, and calling them "functional" is a stretch.
This is the same society where, not too long ago, a couple of public servants - a sort of safety patrol - stood by and watched a kid drown in a pond because it was "against the rules" to attempt a swimming rescue.
This is the society that was recently talking about - and may in fact have done so, since - banning fire extinguishers in apartment buildings because they might encourage an untrained individual to fight a fire.
This is the society that let thousands of angry muslims wave around placards with explicit and graphic threats of violence on them, yet arrested a handful of people who showed up with free-speech themed signs because they might "incite violence".
This is the society where people complained that automated traffic cameras were racially profiling people .
This is the society that has created one of the most complete high-tech surveilance states in the history of the world.
This is the society that has put forward plans to put CCTV cameras inside the homes of 70k or so parents who have been deemed "delinquent" to ensure that the children are fed vegatables and go to bed on time.
This is the society with schools that have banned "sweets" in boxed lunches, fined parents for sending cookies in their children's lunches, and encouraged children to rat on other children.
I could go on all day. That nation is ****ED. It isn't just "that bad", it's worse.
Yes they are truly on a pacifist streak, and the problems it causes is just used as an excuse for the next step in that regard.
Now to appease the Muslims sharia courts are adopted to LEGALLY RULE in cases: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece
PRGGodfather
11-26-09, 15:18
Yes, and that pacifist, apologist, appeasement and concession streak is traveling west -- and these SOB's want to compel us to think the same way. We broke away from those sumbitches a long time ago, and we really need to "nut up or shut up."
I am sick of the moral superiority BS these mincing cosmopolitan MFers try to perpetrate against us, as we politely nod our heads. Our forefathers and veterans sacrificed too much for us get so soft and spread our legs in the air.
Of course, we can't very well say they should pound salt as we borrow more money from Asia, so CEO's can get their bonuses.
And our beloved POTUS is leading the way to assist them.
Happy Thanks-freaking-giving!
Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defense to this charge.
"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."
This statement is just scary, unfortunately the law seems to have been written in the absence of common sense.
- Comments on this story have been disabled for legal reasons
Understandable considering the litigious nature of things, and it conveniently provides cover for a legal system run amok.
kaiservontexas
11-26-09, 23:41
What common law? Common law is dead. St. George took off on the last longboat out of there with the original copy of the Magna Carta.
"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."
Even as bad as things are today, this must be seen to be believed.
The English can't even spell Magan Carta. England is a tyrannical state.
That was funny ;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.