Mr. M, if Osborne et al. hadn't overblown things, Remain would've stood a better chance. Ironic that making the predicted downside smaller would've perhaps led to use staying in.
Mr. Tyndall, to be honest, I'm gladder about avoiding a thermonuclear winter
I've read Shipman. Remain would have just made some other godawful mistake. Other than 'it'll cost money' they really didn't have much in their knapsack.
I'm still reading Shipman's "All Out War". Anybody here who hasn't, you really should. There seem to have been about thirty instances in which Brexit could have been doomed. That it threaded a way through might lead one to think it was divine intervention.
Brexit: it's God's Will. So STFU.....
I recently finished reading Fall Out. Shipman paints a fair and balanced picture of politicians on all sides but May comes across badly. I find it astonishing, just for starters, that she had so little input into the 2017 manifesto. It's almost as though she's untroubled by ANY original thoughts.
The handling of Brexit was always going to be tricky but I think May has made it trickier through her lack of personality, creative thinking and inability to build relationships with people. She is a depressingly poor PM whose abject performance in last year's GE had one ironic, positive effect for her: it has kept her in power.
The Tories fucked up with May and every member of the parliamentary party (aside from Williamson, it seems...) knows it.
I think Williamson thinks he has the perfect solution to the May problem.
Mr. M, if Osborne et al. hadn't overblown things, Remain would've stood a better chance. Ironic that making the predicted downside smaller would've perhaps led to use staying in.
Mr. Tyndall, to be honest, I'm gladder about avoiding a thermonuclear winter
I've read Shipman. Remain would have just made some other godawful mistake. Other than 'it'll cost money' they really didn't have much in their knapsack.
I'm still reading Shipman's "All Out War". Anybody here who hasn't, you really should. There seem to have been about thirty instances in which Brexit could have been doomed. That it threaded a way through might lead one to think it was divine intervention.
Brexit: it's God's Will. So STFU.....
Now it's God's will - not the 'will of the people' (well half of them).
I wasn't being entirely serious.... But - read the book, and then tell me it doesn't feel like God had Brexit's back! (Or maybe they had the luck of the Devil...?)
Brexit has been truly providential for the European Union. At the moment of maximum fragility when it was being assailed by the forces of Putin and Le Pen, the British volunteered to demonstrate to the world the value of EU membership. Our ministers travel around Europe making earnest pleas for close European cooperation within a strong rules-based foundation, and Europe is heading the call.
Mr. M, if Osborne et al. hadn't overblown things, Remain would've stood a better chance. Ironic that making the predicted downside smaller would've perhaps led to use staying in.
Mr. Tyndall, to be honest, I'm gladder about avoiding a thermonuclear winter
I've read Shipman. Remain would have just made some other godawful mistake. Other than 'it'll cost money' they really didn't have much in their knapsack.
I'm still reading Shipman's "All Out War". Anybody here who hasn't, you really should. There seem to have been about thirty instances in which Brexit could have been doomed. That it threaded a way through might lead one to think it was divine intervention.
Brexit: it's God's Will. So STFU.....
I recently finished reading Fall Out. Shipman paints a fair and balanced picture of politicians on all sides but May comes across badly. I find it astonishing, just for starters, that she had so little input into the 2017 manifesto. It's almost as though she's untroubled by ANY original thoughts...
Au contraire - she gives every appearance of being deeply troubled by any original thought...
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
I'm sure that'll work fine in the notably thoughtful, non partisan and self analysing world of US politics. Meanwhile, let's keep selling those lads assault rifles.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
Is there any possibility of a high level Leave to Remain defection as mentioned in the header?
Boris is a possibility. A real horror-show Brexit wouldn't do him or his leadership ambitions any good, so I can imagine him doing a mea culpa and saying he was seduced by the siren voices of Dan Hannan etc., who turned out to be clueless. In one leap he would be free.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
This really is hopeless. After the Chequers summit, May needs to put her negotiating stance to a vote in the House of Commons. If it’s rejected, she resigns.
Parliament needs to share responsibility for the negotiations, especially as it’s hung. If it doesn’t, we are truly headed for a car crash.
On the Times story, why would a trade negotiator from New Zealand hired by Liam Fox ever have imagined he'd have a key role in Brexit negotiations themselves?
The problem of the NI border can only be solved by a customs union,which means bye bye Liam Fox with his shared values to Duterte,and all his Brexit fantasies.The problems for TMay are the increasingly bloodthirsty ERG,all the commitments previously given around the fairyland of free trade deals, statute,both national and European,confirming the status of the GFA,and the DUP,on whom her government depends and who could scupper TMay's Titanic. It's not any cabinet minister who'll sabotage Brexit,it will be Ireland.Irish politics have never been more fascinating.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
I don't mind guns. I used to like shooting, and a member of my family regularly shoots (and has been on the cover of a shooting magazine).
Yet I haven't fired a gun for a couple of decades. There are few places to shoot around here, and I have other hobbies. But if I lived in the back of beyond I'd probably apply for a shotgun, or even a rifle. But guns are totally irrelevant for my current life and lifestyle. They're an irrelevance (and thank God I can say that).
So I'm not instinctively anti-gun. But having said that, the US gun laws are absolutely crazy. Insane. If I lived in the countryside I might have a rifle and/or shotgun, for food or protection from bears and the like. I probably wouldn't find much use for a handgun.
But automatic rifles? Why does any civilian need anything that can repeat (whether automatic (AIUI banned at federal level) or semi-automatic (allowed)?
The way I see it, as generalisations: *) Shotguns. Useful in the country for hunting food and sport. *) Rifles. Useful for protection against animals, and hunting food. *) Handgun. Generally useful only against other humans. *) (semi-)automatic rifles. Useful only for mass slaughter of people.
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
If there were an easy solution it would have been tried by now. Sadly, the real world is very different from that theoretical world inhabited by the politicians.
US politics isn’t helped by the NRA threatening to primary politicians who disagree with their aims, but even they are now coming around to the idea of banning bump stocks and increased checks to stop the mentally ill from acquiring guns. Schools also need increased security.
Much like Nixon in China, Trump has a huge opportunity here as a Republican to reform the gun laws, especially around checks for mental illness.
In last week’s case, it also appears that the FBI were aware of this nutter already, so they have questions to answer.
The problem of the NI border can only be solved by a customs union,which means bye bye Liam Fox with his shared values to Duterte,and all his Brexit fantasies.The problems for TMay are the increasingly bloodthirsty ERG,all the commitments previously given around the fairyland of free trade deals, statute,both national and European,confirming the status of the GFA,and the DUP,on whom her government depends and who could scupper TMay's Titanic. It's not any cabinet minister who'll sabotage Brexit,it will be Ireland.Irish politics have never been more fascinating.
Would you mind terribly adding a space after a comma or full stop. Their absence gives your post a breathless air (and makes it tricky to read). Much obliged, old bean.
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
Well, it was a theory.
If there were an easy solution it would have been tried by now. Sadly, the real world is very different from that theoretical world inhabited by the politicians.
US politics isn’t helped by the NRA threatening to primary politicians who disagree with their aims, but even they are now coming around to the idea of banning bump stocks and increased checks to stop the mentally ill from acquiring guns. Schools also need increased security.
Much like Nixon in China, Trump has a huge opportunity here as a Republican to reform the gun laws, especially around checks for mental illness.
In last week’s case, it also appears that the FBI were aware of this nutter already, so they have questions to answer.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
It is becoming increasingly clear that they are entirely prepared to disrupt trade, at some cost to themselves as well as us, to enforce their set of red lines.
It is becoming increasingly clear that they are entirely prepared to disrupt trade, at some cost to themselves as well as us, to enforce their set of red lines.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
Well, it was a theory.
If there were an easy solution it would have been tried by now. Sadly, the real world is very different from that theoretical world inhabited by the politicians.
US politics isn’t helped by the NRA threatening to primary politicians who disagree with their aims, but even they are now coming around to the idea of banning bump stocks and increased checks to stop the mentally ill from acquiring guns. Schools also need increased security.
Much like Nixon in China, Trump has a huge opportunity here as a Republican to reform the gun laws, especially around checks for mental illness.
In last week’s case, it also appears that the FBI were aware of this nutter already, so they have questions to answer.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
These documents would always have been classified or subject to Cabinet Office disclosure rules (30 years). That the Remoaners want us to publish our negotiating strategy in advance says that thay are only interested in sabotaging the EU negotiations.
Mr. M, if Osborne et al. hadn't overblown things, Remain would've stood a better chance. Ironic that making the predicted downside smaller would've perhaps led to use staying in.
Mr. Tyndall, to be honest, I'm gladder about avoiding a thermonuclear winter
I've read Shipman. Remain would have just made some other godawful mistake. Other than 'it'll cost money' they really didn't have much in their knapsack.
I'm still reading Shipman's "All Out War". Anybody here who hasn't, you really should. There seem to have been about thirty instances in which Brexit could have been doomed. That it threaded a way through might lead one to think it was divine intervention.
Brexit: it's God's Will. So STFU.....
Now it's God's will - not the 'will of the people' (well half of them).
I wasn't being entirely serious.... But - read the book, and then tell me it doesn't feel like God had Brexit's back! (Or maybe they had the luck of the Devil...?)
Brexit has been truly providential for the European Union. At the moment of maximum fragility when it was being assailed by the forces of Putin and Le Pen, the British volunteered to demonstrate to the world the value of EU membership. Our ministers travel around Europe making earnest pleas for close European cooperation within a strong rules-based foundation, and Europe is heading the call.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
It is becoming increasingly clear that they are entirely prepared to disrupt trade, at some cost to themselves as well as us, to enforce their set of red lines.
May's stance on Brexit contains so many contradictions, which are needed in order to keep her party together, that it is impossible for anything but BINO to be agreed.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
Arm teachers, and the next schoolshooter takes a kid as a human shield - and starts shooting from behind them. Is the now armed teacher expected to risk killing the shield? No. Progress? Nil....
Arm the teachers and the next schoolshooter does not have to acquire weapons and bring them in. The weapons will already be there - just whack the teacher and take their weapon.
Also, how long until some teacher shoots another teacher or pupil in a row / fight / argument?
We're agreed - the idea is as dumb as a brick. Guns and schools don't mix, period.
Just when it looked as if Trump might just once do the right thing - normal service is resumed.
Politicians funded by gun manufacturers propose the manufacture of more guns. Unsurprising.
The US had no mass public or school shootings from 1950 to 1980. Since 2000 it has had more than 15.
If guns are solely the cause why are these shootings a recent phenomenon and rarely if ever occurred in the first 225 years of the nations existence despite the second amendment and the right to bear arms.
What is causing young men to do this now when they didn't before? Maybe we should be asking that question?
France is gun free but it didn't stop the Bataclan massacre - because you actually have to want to go out an commit such horrible acts whether guns are legal or not.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
Rabbits certainly need a bit of extra firepower - foxes and stoats currently have the upper hand.
Mr. M, if Osborne et al. hadn't overblown things, Remain would've stood a better chance. Ironic that making the predicted downside smaller would've perhaps led to use staying in.
Mr. Tyndall, to be honest, I'm gladder about avoiding a thermonuclear winter
I've read Shipman. Remain would have just made some other godawful mistake. Other than 'it'll cost money' they really didn't have much in their knapsack.
I'm still reading Shipman's "All Out War". Anybody here who hasn't, you really should. There seem to have been about thirty instances in which Brexit could have been doomed. That it threaded a way through might lead one to think it was divine intervention.
Brexit: it's God's Will. So STFU.....
I recently finished reading Fall Out. Shipman paints a fair and balanced picture of politicians on all sides but May comes across badly. I find it astonishing, just for starters, that she had so little input into the 2017 manifesto. It's almost as though she's untroubled by ANY original thoughts.
The handling of Brexit was always going to be tricky but I think May has made it trickier through her lack of personality, creative thinking and inability to build relationships with people. She is a depressingly poor PM whose abject performance in last year's GE had one ironic, positive effect for her: it has kept her in power.
The Tories fucked up with May and every member of the parliamentary party (aside from Williamson, it seems...) knows it.
May has got through Phase 1 of the negotiations which is in itself a big achievement and something neither Boris nor Leadsom may have achieved, while at the same time keeping the Tories still very competitive with Labour in current polls
Listened to an interesting discussion the other day regarding the impact of rolling news coverage of mass shootings. It is claimed that voluntary guidelines adopted by news channels on the reporting of suicides have had a positive impact on the number of copycat suicides; (keep reports straightforward, don’t speculate on the motivation of the suicidal person, avoid descriptions of the method of suicide).
It is now suggested that 24 news channels repeating many times any footage taken during mass shootings and speculating at length and repeatedly on the “manifesto” of the shooter is having a copycat effect. The repeating of the coverage on a cycle as short as 15 minutes is conditioning the susceptible to see mass shooting in a school environment as the way to express their disaffection, whatever it may be. The person making the suggestion was advocating that the news channels adopt guidelines for coverage given the apparent evidence regarding suicides.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
There’s a bloody good reason why farmers used to spend their Sundays getting together to kill the damn foxes.
That the townies don’t understand isn’t the fault of the countrymen.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Roughly a third of Americans are gun owners as I understand it. So that is approximately 100m people. Of whom 8m have 10 or more guns.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Mr. Jessop, I largely agree. My main concern, though, is increased cockpit evacuation times, particularly if the car is overturned or buried within a soft barrier. Upside down and on fire, a driver's first thought won't be "Thank goodness for the halo" as he's struggling to escape a burning car.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
My daughter had pet rabbits when she was a child. Needless to say found them intensely boring after a few weeks leaving muggins here to clean them out, feed them and water them. Cute is not the word I would use. If I had only been able to find a fox...
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
I don't think the bus is a smart tactic. I have seen no evidence that the Leave bus in the campaign affected the polling or the end result at all, and then there was an actual campaign. Still, if it makes Blair, Clegg et al feel like there is a chance, and diverts them from more effective efforts to thwart democracy, then fair enough.
Off topic, I see the Australians are going to ask for reciprocal working rights, so hopefully CANZUK will actually happen:
So you are saying that non-EU trade deals are going to come with freedom of movement strings attached? Not sure that's what leave supporters want to hear.
Reciprocal working rights are *not* the same as freedom of movement
But they are a set of rules, agreed willingly with another party, which mean we don't control our immigration policy.
Remind you of anything?
Nope. We didn’t like the EU rules so tried to change them. Our partners didn’t want to change, so we said “no thanks” to the whole deal.
Er, what if the Ozzies don't want to change the rules if we want to?
Then we terminate the agreement
The point is that restricting EU immigration was incompatible with EU membership and therefore we had “no control” while remaining a member
What a strange idea of agreements. While undoubtedly true I'm sure you can appreciate that an "I'll sign and abide by this binding agreement until I don't agree with it any more" is slightly strange.
Plus in both examples we had and would have exactly the same degree of control.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Roughly a third of Americans are gun owners as I understand it. So that is approximately 100m people. Of whom 8m have 10 or more guns.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Hunting rifles, target pistols, farm shotguns & the like can be used to hurt people though it's not their primary purpose. I'd guess the vast majority of the other types of firearms bought and sold in the US are specifically designed to hurt and kill people. One the of the deep dishonesties of a lot of the NRA mob is the pretence that this is something to which they're indifferent, that their bump stocked, thermal sighted AR15s are for sporting use or for fun or for the aesthetics, or some similar bullshit reason.
How is this a change in position? Labour have always said "a" custom union (not "the")
It sounds like the same thing to me too. But then isn't everyone essentially arguing for access not membership of the existing structures? It's really going to come down to how much the EU is willing to budge.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
"The fox started it!" is a definitely a novel justification for those who want to torture a wild animal to death as the climax of a social occasion.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
Then how come none were taken?
I once watched a cat (an Australian cat, but that's probably not relevant) 'stalk' a large butterfly trapped in a house. It caught the butterfly, hurt it, and let it escape. The butterfly could not fly well, and the cat would try to get to whereever it settled. It would pounce on it, or try to climb up and get it, then let it go. This lasted for ages, and eventually the cat killed it.
And did not eat it.
Don't think hunting animals don't 'play' with their food, or even just smaller, inedible animals.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Roughly a third of Americans are gun owners as I understand it. So that is approximately 100m people. Of whom 8m have 10 or more guns.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Hunting rifles, target pistols, farm shotguns & the like can be used to hurt people though it's not their primary purpose. I'd guess the vast majority of the other types of firearms bought and sold in the US are specifically designed to hurt and kill people. One the of the deep dishonesties of a lot of the NRA mob is the pretence that this is something to which they're indifferent, that their bump stocked, thermal sighted AR15s are for sporting use or for fun or for the aesthetics, or some similar bullshit reason.
They are mental. A charming lady who was a member was being asked on R5 the other night why she had a gun. She explained that she often had to go to Birmingham, Alabama, in her car and it was not tremendously reliable. If it broke down she might need it to protect herself. Tony commented in this country we normally just phoned the AA.
She was, in fact, an indicator of the problem. She breaks down in a black neighbourhood and her first thought is to pull her gun from the glove compartment. What could possibly go wrong in that scenario?
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
"The fox started it!" is a definitely a novel justification for those who want to torture a wild animal to death as the climax of a social occasion.
Where would you put fox hunting in the top 10 of most woke topics to virtue signal about ? Above or below Syria and Brexit ?
A poor analogy. The 'let's have another referendum because we didn't like the first one' is more akin to the period after a GE but before the new MPs have even assembled in Parliament. It's 'I refuse to accept the election result. I know better.'
You can have another referendum after a suitable period of having tried Brexit. Forty years seems to be the usual period - a nice biblical length.
We can always have a referendum on something different - the specific Brexit we're offered by the Government. If you decide to buy a sofa, or a computer, or any significant purchase and you order it and pay for it, You have a contract and therefore must go through with it - right? Except that if what you end up with is damaged, of poor quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, you have the right to reject it and claim a refund. Always.
So, unless Brexit is less important than a sofa, a chair, a pair of shoes, or anything like that, surely we have to have the right to reject what's offered if it's unfit for purpose or not as described, right? That's what the call for a referendum on the deal is about - give us, the people, the right to make our say on whether the Brexit we're offered is fit for purpose or not; is as described or not. And that we have the right to reject it and claim our refund - getting back to where we started in the first place.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year.....
Then add on those tips that are discarded, multiple tips about a single individual, those handled by county and state police, plus other federal agencies. The number of total tips to process might be many multiples the figure above.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
My daughter had pet rabbits when she was a child. Needless to say found them intensely boring after a few weeks leaving muggins here to clean them out, feed them and water them. Cute is not the word I would use. If I had only been able to find a fox...
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
Then how come none were taken?
I once watched a cat (an Australian cat, but that's probably not relevant) 'stalk' a large butterfly trapped in a house. It caught the butterfly, hurt it, and let it escape. The butterfly could not fly well, and the cat would try to get to whereever it settled. It would pounce on it, or try to climb up and get it, then let it go. This lasted for ages, and eventually the cat killed it.
And did not eat it.
Don't think hunting animals don't 'play' with their food, or even just smaller, inedible animals.
Do you really think these behaviours don't have survival reasons behind them? I can't say why the fox didn't take any. But even if, as you apparently believe, foxes have evolved to be pointlessly, counterproductively sadistic, to waste energy and risk injury for no benefit to themselves, even then it still wouldn't want to starve itself for no reason. So it must have been startled or had some other reason to think it should leave in a hurry.
The FBI have a crap job to do, but in the latest incident it was clear that multiple people had reported the shooter as being mentally unstable and acquiring big guns. They’ve questions to answer as to why they didn’t respond.
I suspect the answer is that (a) the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Tobacco is the responsible agency and therefore information flow between them and the FBI is weak, (b) they probably get told that 1000s of people are mentally unstable every year, (c) if you buy at a gun show, then there are no background checks. I could wander into a gun show tomorrow and buy a semiautomatic shotgun. (For the rabbits.)
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
It's The Guardian. They probably got confused and counted each bullet....
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
It's The Guardian. They probably got confused and counted each bullet....
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
Then how come none were taken?
I once watched a cat (an Australian cat, but that's probably not relevant) 'stalk' a large butterfly trapped in a house. It caught the butterfly, hurt it, and let it escape. The butterfly could not fly well, and the cat would try to get to whereever it settled. It would pounce on it, or try to climb up and get it, then let it go. This lasted for ages, and eventually the cat killed it.
And did not eat it.
Don't think hunting animals don't 'play' with their food, or even just smaller, inedible animals.
Do you really think these behaviours don't have survival reasons behind them? I can't say why the fox didn't take any. But even if, as you apparently believe, foxes have evolved to be pointlessly, counterproductively sadistic, to waste energy and risk injury for no benefit to themselves, even then it still wouldn't want to starve itself for no reason. So it must have been startled or had some other reason to think it should leave in a hurry.
We have to be careful of anthropomorphism, but:
Or perhaps it was just practice? When cubs are young, they need to learn to hunt. Nature documentaries often show such scenes of young animals 'at play'. To make this happen, it's probably enjoyable for the animal. Why would that not be continued later in life?
Or are humans the only animals capable of fun?
So it isn't 'pointlessly, counter-productively sadistic', especially as 'sadistic' (and to a lesser extent, 'fun') is a very human concept (or even a societal one), and one that is probably difficult to carry over into the animal world.
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
"The fox started it!" is a definitely a novel justification for those who want to torture a wild animal to death as the climax of a social occasion.
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Roughly a third of Americans are gun owners as I understand it. So that is approximately 100m people. Of whom 8m have 10 or more guns.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Every gun is dangerous.
I wouldn't think nine guns are OK but ten is dangerous. One is dangerous. Ten seems a rather arbitary metric.
We can reject the referendum result and the settlement, or rather the Government can. It's up to them to implement the will of the people, or explain why not. They now know the will of the people.
Dave went and negotiated but he didn't try very hard and was punished as a result. If the EU believe that playing really hardball will make us change our minds, they misread the British public, and they will also hurt themselves. Such a transparent cunning plan will only harden resolve.
If the Government come back again and say "Sorry, our masters have decided we can't leave without a punishment beating, so let's back down and grovel." do you really think that Remain could win another referendum?
How anyone can vote for this clown and sleep at night is a mystery to me.
Oh crikey, does that mean he collaborated with the Americans then??!!!
What a load of nonsense, the file details his support for Left Wing groups in Central America. Let's remember of course that the US was on the side that walked into a cathedral and murdered the Archbishop San Salvador, and murdered a bus load of nuns...
They are mental. A charming lady who was a member was being asked on R5 the other night why she had a gun. She explained that she often had to go to Birmingham, Alabama, in her car and it was not tremendously reliable. If it broke down she might need it to protect herself. Tony commented in this country we normally just phoned the AA.
She was, in fact, an indicator of the problem. She breaks down in a black neighbourhood and her first thought is to pull her gun from the glove compartment. What could possibly go wrong in that scenario?
A hundred years ago, one of Britain's first female motorists (and inventor of the rear-view mirror) wrote a book about driving for women.
She also advised women travelling alone to carry a handgun; her recommendation was an automatic Colt, as in her opinion its relative lack of recoil made it particularly suitable for women.
It's easy to forget that our own culture has taken a long journey wrt guns. Read Sherlock Holmes and see how he asks Watson to get out his gun (fnarr). Whilst we were nowhere near as bad as the US is now, we have made vast changes to societal attitudes to firearms.
I hold little hope of the US even starting a similar journey.
How anyone can vote for this clown and sleep at night is a mystery to me.
You can but we will still end up out of the EU with a 'special relationship' with Cuba rather than the USA (unless Bernie Sanders wins in 2020 of course)
I find the right to buy, possess or use automatic rifles quite bizarre. I also find the story in the Guardian a few days ago that there are 7.7m people with more than 140 guns just bewildering. In fairness to the FBI their resources must be pretty thinly spread with that level of nutterdom tolerated.
The Guardian number is bullshit.
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
Have to say, it was in the Guardian and it seemed odd. But even your link says that 8% of gun owners have 10 or more guns. That is still a lot of people. And I can't help feeling that with so many millions of guns around there will be a significant number that are not registered with anyone.
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I don't think that is so extraordinary.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country. Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
Roughly a third of Americans are gun owners as I understand it. So that is approximately 100m people. Of whom 8m have 10 or more guns.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Every gun is dangerous.
I wouldn't think nine guns are OK but ten is dangerous. One is dangerous. Ten seems a rather arbitary metric.
Except it is easier to keep control of one gun over ten, especially if you don't have to keep them locked up.
"Where's my gun?" "Oh, it's in its holster."
"Where's my tenth gun?" "Darned it, I'm a gun nut and I can only count to nine because i blew off my little pinkie whilst playing with my toys."
Mr. L, the viciousness of rabbits was proven beyond doubt in the documentary Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Not to mention the documentary, Night of the Lepus.
Rabbits are cute. Foxes, however...
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
It's not killing them for play. It's encountered a lot more easy prey than it can carry. The obvious choice for its survival is to kill as many as it can, carry off what it can, and potentially return later to get the rest (if it thinks it's safe). It's a fox, it doesn't understand that it could leave the hen alive and it would definitely still be there when it returns
"The fox started it!" is a definitely a novel justification for those who want to torture a wild animal to death as the climax of a social occasion.
Foxes need to be killed. Fox hunting was not cruel. So what happened before they were killed, and what people wore the while, was irrelevant .
How anyone can vote for this clown and sleep at night is a mystery to me.
Oh crikey, does that mean he collaborated with the Americans then??!!!
What a load of nonsense, the file details his support for Left Wing groups in Central America. Let's remember of course that the US was on the side that walked into a cathedral and murdered the Archbishop San Salvador, and murdered a bus load of nuns...
Osborne doesn’t get things quite right. A customs union without the Single Market will still require customs checks in Northern Ireland and Dover/Calais to ensure that goods entering the EU are compatible with Single Market standards, and those entering the U.K. are compatible with ours. However, there will certainly not be a requirement to hold up every shipment thanks to data sharing, AEOs etc. Not having to pay any tariffs will help to preserve cross-border supply chains, but we still will need to spend money on customs infrastructure for standard assessment.
While it’s not my ideal solution, a customs union with the EU outside the Single Market will respect the referendum result, based on what I believe most Leave voters were voting on. The problem is that the small minority who thought it was about giving the U.K. the uninhibited right to negotiate its own trade deals largely sit on the Tory backbenches.
It is becoming increasingly clear that they are entirely prepared to disrupt trade, at some cost to themselves as well as us, to enforce their set of red lines.
But the Leavers told us this would be easy.
Of course it will be easy, 27 governments will do exactly as TMay and Davis tell them to do....
Comments
1910s
Deaths: 11
Injuries: 12 +
1920s
Deaths: 5
Injuries: 5
1930s
Deaths: 10
Injuries: 3
1940s
Deaths: 11
injuries: 2
1950s
Deaths: 13
Injuries: 8
1960s
Deaths: 42
Injuries: 65
1970s
Deaths: 36
Injuries: 65
1980's
Deaths: 51
Injuries: 162
1990's
Deaths: 91
Injuries: 152
2000's
Deaths: 107
Injuries: 137
https://www.snopes.com/2018/02/16/how-many-school-shootings-in-2018/
Parliament needs to share responsibility for the negotiations, especially as it’s hung. If it doesn’t, we are truly headed for a car crash.
It's not any cabinet minister who'll sabotage Brexit,it will be Ireland.Irish politics have never been more fascinating.
EDIT: It was still a bullshit comment, either way.
Yet I haven't fired a gun for a couple of decades. There are few places to shoot around here, and I have other hobbies. But if I lived in the back of beyond I'd probably apply for a shotgun, or even a rifle. But guns are totally irrelevant for my current life and lifestyle. They're an irrelevance (and thank God I can say that).
So I'm not instinctively anti-gun. But having said that, the US gun laws are absolutely crazy. Insane. If I lived in the countryside I might have a rifle and/or shotgun, for food or protection from bears and the like. I probably wouldn't find much use for a handgun.
But automatic rifles? Why does any civilian need anything that can repeat (whether automatic (AIUI banned at federal level) or semi-automatic (allowed)?
The way I see it, as generalisations:
*) Shotguns. Useful in the country for hunting food and sport.
*) Rifles. Useful for protection against animals, and hunting food.
*) Handgun. Generally useful only against other humans.
*) (semi-)automatic rifles. Useful only for mass slaughter of people.
US politics isn’t helped by the NRA threatening to primary politicians who disagree with their aims, but even they are now coming around to the idea of banning bump stocks and increased checks to stop the mentally ill from acquiring guns. Schools also need increased security.
Much like Nixon in China, Trump has a huge opportunity here as a Republican to reform the gun laws, especially around checks for mental illness.
In last week’s case, it also appears that the FBI were aware of this nutter already, so they have questions to answer.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/peter-tatchell-canterbury-how-it-feels-to-be-on-the-frontline-of-the-free-speech-wars
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/22/eu-rules-out-uks-preferred-approach-to-future-trade-deal
It is becoming increasingly clear that they are entirely prepared to disrupt trade, at some cost to themselves as well as us, to enforce their set of red lines.
Not sure how we comes out well from reversing (again) that stance
There are 310m guns in the United States (source).
If 7.7m had 140 guns each, then the rest of the United States must have minus 750 million or so.
You can understand why the voters didn’t want to give Mrs May a landslide or indeed any kind of majority.
Stick that on the side of your bus...
McLaren has Marilyn Monroed itself in the wind. It is very orange.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43156785
It is now suggested that 24 news channels repeating many times any footage taken during mass shootings and speculating at length and repeatedly on the “manifesto” of the shooter is having a copycat effect. The repeating of the coverage on a cycle as short as 15 minutes is conditioning the susceptible to see mass shooting in a school environment as the way to express their disaffection, whatever it may be. The person making the suggestion was advocating that the news channels adopt guidelines for coverage given the apparent evidence regarding suicides.
https://crooked.com/podcast/hold-my-putter/
Last 15 minutes or so... warning the rest of the podcast is relentlessly anti-Trump...
Watch out for those rabbits. I am sure they are vicious.
I once saw a couple of pea-hens that a fox had ripped apart when it had got into an enclosure. It had not eaten them, and had just killed them. The owner said it was not the first time; on a previous occasion she had heard them screaming as the fox played with its prey.
If foxes can hunt other animals and kill them for 'play', then we can do the same to them.
Firstly it's 8% of gun owners, not 8% of the country.
Secondly many collect them as a hobby or for other reasons.
I know people who collect stamps, or coins or Games Workshop miniatures or all sorts of other things. Every one of those collectors would have 10 or more of whatever they collect.
That the townies don’t understand isn’t the fault of the countrymen.
Here's the thing, unlike stamps or coins guns are dangerous. They can be used to hurt people. 10 guns to me sounds like the owner may have an unhealthy obsession with shooting things. This strikes me as sub-optimal.
Plus in both examples we had and would have exactly the same degree of control.
I once watched a cat (an Australian cat, but that's probably not relevant) 'stalk' a large butterfly trapped in a house. It caught the butterfly, hurt it, and let it escape. The butterfly could not fly well, and the cat would try to get to whereever it settled. It would pounce on it, or try to climb up and get it, then let it go. This lasted for ages, and eventually the cat killed it.
And did not eat it.
Don't think hunting animals don't 'play' with their food, or even just smaller, inedible animals.
She was, in fact, an indicator of the problem. She breaks down in a black neighbourhood and her first thought is to pull her gun from the glove compartment. What could possibly go wrong in that scenario?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/966650397002813440
If you decide to buy a sofa, or a computer, or any significant purchase and you order it and pay for it, You have a contract and therefore must go through with it - right? Except that if what you end up with is damaged, of poor quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, you have the right to reject it and claim a refund. Always.
So, unless Brexit is less important than a sofa, a chair, a pair of shoes, or anything like that, surely we have to have the right to reject what's offered if it's unfit for purpose or not as described, right? That's what the call for a referendum on the deal is about - give us, the people, the right to make our say on whether the Brexit we're offered is fit for purpose or not; is as described or not. And that we have the right to reject it and claim our refund - getting back to where we started in the first place.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-tns-bc-fla-schoolshooting-fbi-20180216-story.html
Then add on those tips that are discarded, multiple tips about a single individual, those handled by county and state police, plus other federal agencies. The number of total tips to process might be many multiples the figure above.
"That top 14% of gun owners – a group of 7.7m people, or 3% of American adults – own between about eight and 140 guns each. The average is 17."
Yeah, it's probably The Guardian's fault.
SJWs should boycott Orcas until they stop this beastly activity.
How anyone can vote for this clown and sleep at night is a mystery to me.
Or perhaps it was just practice? When cubs are young, they need to learn to hunt. Nature documentaries often show such scenes of young animals 'at play'. To make this happen, it's probably enjoyable for the animal. Why would that not be continued later in life?
Or are humans the only animals capable of fun?
So it isn't 'pointlessly, counter-productively sadistic', especially as 'sadistic' (and to a lesser extent, 'fun') is a very human concept (or even a societal one), and one that is probably difficult to carry over into the animal world.
I wouldn't think nine guns are OK but ten is dangerous. One is dangerous. Ten seems a rather arbitary metric.
We can reject the referendum result and the settlement, or rather the Government can. It's up to them to implement the will of the people, or explain why not. They now know the will of the people.
Dave went and negotiated but he didn't try very hard and was punished as a result. If the EU believe that playing really hardball will make us change our minds, they misread the British public, and they will also hurt themselves. Such a transparent cunning plan will only harden resolve.
If the Government come back again and say "Sorry, our masters have decided we can't leave without a punishment beating, so let's back down and grovel." do you really think that Remain could win another referendum?
What a load of nonsense, the file details his support for Left Wing groups in Central America. Let's remember of course that the US was on the side that walked into a cathedral and murdered the Archbishop San Salvador, and murdered a bus load of nuns...
It's easy to forget that our own culture has taken a long journey wrt guns. Read Sherlock Holmes and see how he asks Watson to get out his gun (fnarr). Whilst we were nowhere near as bad as the US is now, we have made vast changes to societal attitudes to firearms.
I hold little hope of the US even starting a similar journey.
"Where's my gun?"
"Oh, it's in its holster."
"Where's my tenth gun?"
"Darned it, I'm a gun nut and I can only count to nine because i blew off my little pinkie whilst playing with my toys."
Great news
While it’s not my ideal solution, a customs union with the EU outside the Single Market will respect the referendum result, based on what I believe most Leave voters were voting on. The problem is that the small minority who thought it was about giving the U.K. the uninhibited right to negotiate its own trade deals largely sit on the Tory backbenches.
Jezza sold secrets to Czech spy!
Nope, and he's suing the dimwit who suggested it.
Jezza is foolishly drawing attention to his own traitorousness! Why isn't Jezza giving permission for his Stasi file to be released?!
Germany says there is no file.
It must have been destroyed! Jezza must give permission for his CIA file to be released!
and so on.
Probably needs more exclamation marks to fully capture their moist, breathless excitement, but I couldn't be arsed.
https://mobile.twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/966663620875694081
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-golf/in-chavez-era-throwback-venezuela-seizes-part-of-a-golf-course-idUSKCN1G52UN