Re: A Quesion for Sylvia Else (stun guns)

snipped-for-privacy@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

one

I did read what you wrote, here it is again:

"**The police are highly trained. They are trained to assess a given situation and react accordingly. They are also given some legal training and fully understand that, if they do kill someone, that they will be (rightfully) subject to rigorous and penetrating investigative prosesses. Civlians are not (usually) so trained. For those and other reasons, civilians should not possess deadly (or other weapons) when going about their daily routine."

You're saying Police should carry deadly weapons (as opposed to civilians) because they are "highly trained" both in the use of arms and in the legal aspects of using those arms, as well as being trained in how to respond to potentially violent situations, am I right?

But you're now saying that civilians who have undergone similar training (or perhaps even more extensive training) shouldn't carry arms?

You really are a quite confused little child aren't you.

You've given me that advice before, what is it with you and 9 year olds?

Oops, forget I asked that question, I don't want the answer.

As there doesn't appear to be any 9 year olds available, why don't you try?

r.

nut

You normally brand anyone who disagrees with you as a nut-job. That's OK, I view being branded a nut-job by a self-centred arrogant zealot like you to be a badge of honour.

I guess being branded a nut-job is an improvement on being compared to Timothy McViegh or the Unabomber, as you've done to other gun owners who've disagreed with you.

Tell us agin about your friend who can STOP his heart.

Reply to
John - Melb
Loading thread data ...

**Nothing sinister in my words. I am not attempting to suggest that John McNamara (aka: John Melb) is a paedophile. There is no evidence to suggest that he is anything of the kind. Amongst his many problems he has demonstrated the reading and comprehension abilities which are approximately equivalent to a 7 year old child. Hence, I suggested he consult with someone who can actually understand plain English at a higher level than he is able to. A 9 year old should suffice.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

**Correct. Based on these figures:

formatting link

It seems clear that the US is no more violent than any other Western, Democratic, developed nation.

What is perfectly clear, however, is that the US is far more deadly than most (all?) other Western, Democratic, developed nations:

formatting link

Tellingly, most of those murders (in the US) are committed via the use of guns (specifically: Handguns):

formatting link

**The figures for people legitemately shooting alleged criminals (I say alleged, because in places like Texas, it would seem that the authorites are now prepared to accept the word of the 'last man standing', as to the legitemacy of the shooting) are miniscule in the extreme. FBI figures show that, in the US, something like 400-odd people are shot and killed by police in so-called 'justifiable homicide' acts each year. This figure needs to be examined in the same light as the number killed by civilians in similar circumstances. The figure for civilians is approximately 230 PA. That figure needs to be tempered by the inadequacies of the laws in places like Texas, where lip service is paid by LEOs under many circumstances. Additionally, one must bear in mind that the number of civilians killed by gunshot each year in the US is approximately 10,000. Clearly, carrying guns for self defence purposes is a failed experiment. It is an experiment that many of the nutters in the pro-gun lobby, here in Australia, wish to duplicate. These are the same individuals who seem to feel that shooting native ducks and other indigenous critters is, somehow, sporting. They seem to consider that the indiscriminate spraying of lead shot into pristine environments, whilst causing the needless suffering of wild animals is all in a good cause.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

t

ely

one

le

Trevor has of course the necessary psych and educational qualifications to make such a statement (ROFLMAO)

Reply to
John - Melb

are

w

ice

be

ure

,
s
r

Trevor has posted such rants before, he posts them here because he doesn't believe that anybody know enough about the subject matter to challenge him, every time he posts such rants on gun related group he gets spanked badly.

Reading the above Trevor, are you again asserting that a Defensive Gun Use (DGU) requires a dead body, and if there's no dead body, then the DGU didn't happen?

Reply to
John - Melb

Trevor has posted such rants before, he posts them here because he doesn't believe that anybody know enough about the subject matter to challenge him, every time he posts such rants on gun related group he gets spanked badly.

Reading the above Trevor, are you again asserting that a Defensive Gun Use (DGU) requires a dead body, and if there's no dead body, then the DGU didn't happen?

**Read what I wrote. If you don't understand what is written, ask a 9 year old.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

r

I did read what you wrote, it appears you are unable to answer a question about your posted assertion without the assistance of some (apparently unavailble) 9 year old?

Reply to
John - Melb

messagenews: snipped-for-privacy@h28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

I did read what you wrote, here it is again:

"**The police are highly trained. They are trained to assess a given situation and react accordingly. They are also given some legal training and fully understand that, if they do kill someone, that they will be (rightfully) subject to rigorous and penetrating investigative prosesses. Civlians are not (usually) so trained. For those and other reasons, civilians should not possess deadly (or other weapons) when going about their daily routine."

You're saying Police should carry deadly weapons (as opposed to civilians) because they are "highly trained" both in the use of arms and in the legal aspects of using those arms, as well as being trained in how to respond to potentially violent situations, am I right?

**Good to see you've consulted a 9 year old to explain it to you.

But you're now saying that civilians who have undergone similar training (or perhaps even more extensive training) shouldn't carry arms?

**Where (precisely) did I say that? Please cite my words.

You really are a quite confused little child aren't you.

You've given me that advice before, what is it with you and 9 year olds?

**A typical 9 year old has superior reading and comprehension abilities to you.

Oops, forget I asked that question, I don't want the answer.

**Too late. I've already answered.

As there doesn't appear to be any 9 year olds available, why don't you try?

**No point. I have neither the time, nor the patience to deal with idiots like you. You are (allegedly) an adult. I suggest you acquire an adult level education, so you can converse with the rest of the adults. There are many places where you can do so. Start here:

formatting link

Or here:

formatting link

Or here:

formatting link

You normally brand anyone who disagrees with you as a nut-job.

**Incorrect. I brand YOU as a nut job. I, for instance, frequently dissagree with Sylvia. I do not regard her as a nut job. She appears to be well educated, thoughtful and intelligent. You are none of those things.

That's OK, I view being branded a nut-job by a self-centred arrogant zealot like you to be a badge of honour.

**Of course you do. You may believe anything you wish.

I guess being branded a nut-job is an improvement on being compared to Timothy McViegh or the Unabomber, as you've done to other gun owners who've disagreed with you.

**Please compile a complete list of all the people I have compared to the Unabomber. Please the list here:
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

snipped-for-privacy@h11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

ps.com...

So you're saying when you assert something, the opposite is not also true?

" **You ARE a nut job. Nut jobs should not have any access to firearms.Ever. That is just good public policy."

I've had training similar to, if not more extensive, than many Police get in the subject matter, and I've been required to carry arms in public where my rules for employing arms, if necessary, is actually more "open" than the Police. I've have been in situations where a Police oficer would not be entitled to employ deadly force, but I would have been.

But then accroding to Trevor Tosspot, I'm a nut-job.

o

That'd be the first question you've answered in a very long time.

vel

y

Failure to answer a question about an asertion you posted noted, and I thought you "only deal in facts"?

r

ree

Thank you for giving me your permission to have an opinion, my but you're an arrogant soul aren't you.

Ardeet........

not

On Jun 17, 10:05 am, "Trevor Wilson" wrote: "I have neither the time, nor the patience"

Reply to
John - Melb

I

o not

.

le

ve

ow

.
r

n't

he

d

he

_____________________________________________________-

Reply to
John - Melb

Reply to
John - Melb

I

o not

You're right, c> That could be part of the problem. Many of us on the gun

Reply to
John - Melb

not

Some more "c> >

Reply to
John - Melb

So, there are no lathes or milling machines in Oz? No one with any metalworking skills, or any machine tools at their homes? All early guns & rifles were made completely by hand. In your fantasy world, no one would have hands, any tools, food or anything else, because you can kill with almost anything you think of. What would you do without water? It doesn't take long to hold someone's head under water, till the drown. It only takes a couple gallons. Your shoe laces can be tied around someone's neck, to choke them to death. You can run them down with a car or truck.

And you call American's paranoid. Between you & Phil, I can see why Oz wants to disarm everyone. Soon, they'll need babysitters to change your diapers, for you, too.

I understand where the 'Rage' comes from. you are angry at the world for being a world class sissy who would rather die, than own a gun.

The US Army taught me to kill, but I haven't. I can own almost any weapon short of a tank, rocket launcher, fighter jet or bomber, but I still have never aimed a weapon at anyone. The only time I needed one, all I had was a hot soldering iron but it was enough to scare off that drunken fool.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

**Banal logic noted. FYI: It is legal for law-abiding Australians to own guns. Australians who wish to own a gun, do not need to manufacture one. In fact, the cost of a hand made gun, plus it's potential for poor reliability and accuracy, makes it a non-viable option. Any criminal with the equipment and skills to manufacture a firearm, is likely to be gainfully employed anyway, so is unlikely to want to manufacture such a weapon.
**I call it the way the entire world sees it. Americans ARE extremely paranoid.

Between you & Phil, I can see why

**Non-sequitur. It is legal for law-abiding Australians to own firearms. I have no problem with this, as long as they adhere to the law of the land. On a personal level, I am bothered by the disturbing actions of SOME gun owners, who seem to enjoy killing, for the sake of it. They have little concern for the suffering of animals, nor for the contamination of pristine environments with lead.

Soon, they'll need babysitters to change

**You are most welcome to come visit our wonderful nation and repeat those words in my local pub. Anytime you want.
**Huh? Perhaps you'd care to explain that little leap of logic. On this planet, it makes no sense.
**So?
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

Where do you think lead comes from? Could you quantify the amount of firearm lead contaminating pristine environments?

Reply to
F Murtz

Stopping his heart in nothing compared to Trevor, who shut down his mind. Then it wouldn't restart. Rather a pathetic individual. I would like to see his sorry ass go through basic training, crawling under barb wire, and live machine gun fire. he would cry for weeks after being gassed with real US Army (or NATO) tear gas inside a concrete block building, and having to wait till they unlocked the doors to get out. Then again, he thinks audio is rocket science.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Too bad you're barely six years old, mentally. :(

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

He is ignoring the fact that areas of the US that issue 'Concealed Carry' permits have the lowest number of gun crimes, and the ones that refuse to allow you to carry have the highest. Or that a lot of that crime is by gangs shooting at each other, or illegal aliens committing crimes, and shooting anyone who can identify them. In other words he is a liar, and idiot for thinking no one will knew he's a liar.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Nine year olds are too smart to hang out with an idiot like Trevor.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.