RE: Gun control in the U.K.

RE: Gun control in the U.K. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 2:47:35 PM)
Polite, the Vinnie Jones there listed, is that the actor Vinnie Jones?

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 2:48:57 PM)
'Pears he had a great deal more.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 2:51:21 PM)
You are aware that you could have gone to wikibullshit.com, copied a random page, pasted it here, and had some tiny chance of linking Robert Gascoyne-Cecil to the 1903 Pistols Act, right? Instead you pasted the known total whiff.

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 2:52:39 PM)
Here is the slippery slope in its entirety, before it was repealed in 1920. http://dvc.org.uk/dunblane/pistolsact.html So, any slippery slope nutsackerisms are right out of Wayne LaPierre. The old boy Salisbury died in July 1902, and his Nephew Art Balfour, became PM on his death to carry on his works. You know, the Balfour bloke who was the Balfour bloke of the Balfour Declaration to Rothschild when he was Foreign Secretary after being Prime Minister? We dont do that here, might be what has you colonials confused. They have a bit more continuity to their governments than us wogs across the pond, even on party change.

lovmuffin -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 3:27:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail The pistols act of 1903 fundamentally was a 5 bob fine for selling a pistol to an insane person or a drunk, there was no fuckin slippery slope there, you cant do it here, neither, and haven't been able to for quite some time. What asswipe. The OP did state that the 1903 law was "a minor one". "It was the first toe over a slippery slope" can refer to gun control having started. It doesn't have to mean it slipped and started going full speed ahead, just that the slope was slippery. Why are we arguing semantics ?? " It was the first toe over a slippery slope " is an opinion, not a point of fact. What parts of the OP, stated as fact, are not accurate ?

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 3:34:52 PM)
Just as nutsackers are responsible for gun control in this country. Reagan in California, Nixon in 68, the republican legislature in minnesota requiring a CLEO signed permit to carry and even to acquire. None of it minor. Its nutsackers doing this slippery slope, Democrats are not that ignorant, they arent gun controlling, they are the ones that have to fight the wars for the cowardly nutsackers. No more than is wrong with that.

lovmuffin -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:10:14 PM)
Ok, whatever. I'm still looking for a non accurate part of the OP stated as a point of fact. Good Grief.

Politesub53 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:28:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave You are aware that you could have gone to wikibullshit.com, copied a random page, pasted it here, and had some tiny chance of linking Robert Gascoyne-Cecil to the 1903 Pistols Act, right? Instead you pasted the known total whiff. Well I posted the link and told you to go look, or how to find it. Obviously you didnt. If you had............. or you might have seen the words LIBRARY OF CONGRESS I take it even you feel that is a suitable web site ???

Politesub53 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:30:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin Ok, whatever. I'm still looking for a non accurate part of the OP stated as a point of fact. Good Grief. The slippery slope is non accurate. I stopped right there. Again Ron gets it, but it obviously doesnt fit your agenda to use credible links.

Politesub53 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:38:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Polite, the Vinnie Jones there listed, is that the actor Vinnie Jones? Yes Ron..... Vinnie had his gun license revocked after being convicted of assault.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:43:24 PM)
quote: I take it even you feel that is a suitable web site ??? I think a suitable site would be one that links Robert Gascoyne-Cecil to the 1903 Pistol Act. He didn't sign it. Did he author it? Lobby for it? Anything?

Politesub53 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:49:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: I take it even you feel that is a suitable web site ??? I think a suitable site would be one that links Robert Gascoyne-Cecil to the 1903 Pistol Act. He didn't sign it. Did he author it? Lobby for it? Anything? Oh good...... you have finally given up insisting the Op was credible and are focussed on a point I made. Maybe one of the other Brits will enlighten you on how our Parliament works. Ron, you can lead a horse to water, but you cant make him drink.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:51:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: I take it even you feel that is a suitable web site ??? I think a suitable site would be one that links Robert Gascoyne-Cecil to the 1903 Pistol Act. He didn't sign it. Did he author it? Lobby for it? Anything? Ron gave you the answer. The old knob kicked the bucket before it was brought into law. So you can't legitimately link him with the 1903 Pistol Act cuz he had nowt to do with it.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:55:05 PM)
OMG OMG OMG ROTFLMAO The insanity has come full circle. Please refer to post 162. I am the one saying the "old knob had nowt to do with it" Toooooo funny

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 4:59:04 PM)
I do try to crack a smile sometimes [:D]

lovmuffin -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 5:08:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin Ok, whatever. I'm still looking for a non accurate part of the OP stated as a point of fact. Good Grief. The slippery slope is non accurate. I stopped right there. Again Ron gets it, but it obviously doesnt fit your agenda to use credible links. I addressed the slippery slope in post #185. If you interpret one way and I interpret another we are arguing semantics. Yet you can't seem to come up with one lousey thing in the OP, that was stated as a point of fact, that is not accurate. Go figure.

deathtothepixies -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 5:35:14 PM)
there is no slippery slope, a quote from the OP's link "Am I suggesting that there has been some nefarious plan all along to disarm and subjugate the British people? Yes, partly. I am also suggesting that this is a cycle of government behaviour long recognised, one we should be paying attention to, and breaking. We KNOW what governments do; they acquire power at the expense of the governed. They do it slowly, almost imperceptibly, and usually for nefarious reasons and political expediency" that is an entirely American point of view. We do not feel subjugated by our inability to arm ourselves, we feel safe and secure because guns are not an integral part of our lives and culture. Most of this thread is a joke because it has no relevance to the way British people live their lives. I know some posters feel that the Brits are attacking them re. guns but don't try and drag us into some kind of personal freedom =guns for everyone argument because it just isn't relevant to our daily lives

PeonForHer -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/24/2014 7:39:06 PM)
quote: I know some posters feel that the Brits are attacking them re. guns but don't try and drag us into some kind of personal freedom =guns for everyone argument because it just isn't relevant to our daily lives Pfft. Guns make you free, cars make you free; I've even heard that cigarettes, lipstick and mascara can make you free. . . . All these lovely, lovely things that make you free so long as you can afford to buy them. I have no doubt at all that the same sort of hogwash is fed to people on both sides of the Atlantic, with only minor variations.

Politesub53 -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/25/2014 7:12:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I addressed the slippery slope in post #185. If you interpret one way and I interpret another we are arguing semantics. Yet you can't seem to come up with one lousey thing in the OP, that was stated as a point of fact, that is not accurate. Go figure. We are hardly arguing semantics when others, as well as myself, have pointed out the OP is bullshit. It is interesting that the original posters hasnt returned to defend this crap. nor indeed supply a credible source. I clearly gave a link for your own congressional library, showing that both the hungerford and Dunblame massacres resulted in a change in the law demandaed by "We the people". I would have thought your own congressional library would have been a good enough source, even for the gun nuts, obviously it wasnt. If you are unable or unwilling to post valid links, even to back your clown claims let alone the OP, then thats your problem. But lets get it right, I have shown from a valid source that the 1903 Pistols act was more about raising money via indrect taxes, anyone could walk into a post office and obtain a gun license.

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control in the U.K. (3/25/2014 7:58:49 AM)
Well, the most interesting aspect of this slippery slope hallucination would be the apologists rendition of how this 1903 law came to be repealed in 1920 as the slope was slipping. I want to see the vermiformous arguements that must be made to show causal linkages.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875