Piers Morgan's gun control views lead to petition for deportation [Archive]

geetrue

12-24-12, 01:11 PM

These people are out and out mad at Piers Morgan.
He's the English man on CNN news at night.

Seems he did an interview with a gun rights advocate and called him stupid ...

Not good Piers to make people in American mad at you ...

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/12/24/piers-morgan-gun-control-views-lead-to-petition-for-deportation/

Published December 24, 2012
Associated Press

Tens of thousands of people have signed a petition calling for British CNN host Piers Morgan to be deported from the U.S. over his gun control views.

Morgan has taken an aggressive stand for tighter U.S. gun laws in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting. Last week, he called a gun advocate appearing on his "Piers Morgan Tonight" show an "unbelievably stupid man."

Now, gun rights activists are fighting back. A petition created Dec. 21 on the White House e-petition website by a user in Texas accuses Morgan of engaging in a "hostile attack against the U.S. Constitution" by targeting the Second Amendment.

It demands he be deported immediately for "exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens."

The petition has already hit the 25,000 signature threshold to get a White House response. By Monday, it had 31,813 signatures.

CaptainMattJ.

12-24-12, 01:30 PM

Immensely hypocritical and downright stupid.

These people have nothing better to do?

Takeda Shingen

12-24-12, 01:32 PM

I'm pretty sure that's going to go nowhere. I'm also pretty sure that he'll get some great ratings for awhile. I'd say that Piers Morgan will get exactly what he wants out of the matter.

GoldenRivet

12-24-12, 01:33 PM

I think this is a little extreme... he has the first amendment right to say as he pleases.

but yes I see the point of him being a tv personality "talking head" sending people a message that we shouldn't have a specific constitutional right.

I do have a problem with that use of his position but i think a petition for deportation is a little much

STEED

12-24-12, 01:36 PM

You wanted him, you can bloody keep him, we in the UK were glad to get shot of him.

Takeda Shingen

12-24-12, 01:38 PM

You wanted him, you can bloody keep him, we in the UK were glad to get shot of him.

Well, I think that's hardly a fair deal. You guys should have to take either Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity as compensation.

STEED

12-24-12, 01:40 PM

Well, I think that's hardly a fair deal. You guys should have to take either Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity as compensation.

WHO???????? :har:

Takeda Shingen

12-24-12, 01:43 PM

WHO???????? :har:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Hannity

I have a hard time believing that you read GT every day and have never come across either of those two names. :hmmm:

Jimbuna

12-24-12, 01:45 PM

You wanted him, you can bloody keep him, we in the UK were glad to get shot of him.

Too bloody right :)

STEED

12-24-12, 01:48 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Hannity

I have a hard time believing that you read GT every day and have never come across either of those two names. :hmmm:

Tell you what, pack all three in a box and send them down under. :03::haha:

CaptainMattJ.

12-24-12, 01:51 PM

If you listen to Rush Limbaugh long enough your brain will turn to mush. He's so infinitely stupid it's mind-numbing.

TarJak

12-24-12, 02:28 PM

Tell you what, pack all three in a box and send them down under. :03::haha:

Sod that. We have enough idjits in our media case it is.

AVGWarhawk

12-24-12, 02:38 PM

Well, I think that's hardly a fair deal. You guys should have to take either Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity as compensation.

We will also toss in Chris Matthews as well.

Armistead

12-24-12, 03:09 PM

I saw that, if I was that man, I would've walked out. The man wouldn't get two words out and Morgan went into fits, demanding he answer his questions, when the man tried, cut off again.....I don't the man got out one complete sentence, why Morgan would call him immature names.

Platapus

12-24-12, 03:15 PM

"Tens of thousands of people have signed a petition calling for British CNN host Piers Morgan to be deported from the U.S. over his gun control views."

Last time I checked, that was not illegal and hence not grounds for deportation.

Here is a wacky idea. If they disagree with Morgan, they should choose to use their rights and not watch his program.

I don't watch his program and I did not even know (or care) about his position on gun control.

BossMark

12-24-12, 03:25 PM

You wanted him, you can bloody keep him, we in the UK were glad to get shot of him.
Aye keep him he not wanted here good riddance to bad meat.

Oberon

12-24-12, 03:37 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkF_XpA5P48

Sailor Steve

12-24-12, 03:42 PM

That's so very British. I applaud politely, with only a hint of sarcasm.

Jimbuna

12-24-12, 04:30 PM

From one loser to another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW0SLoZvm-E

CaptainHaplo

12-24-12, 07:55 PM

Morgan is an idiot.

However, a lot of people died so that he could come here - even as a citizen from somewhere else - and be an idiot - on TV no less.

I wouldn't sign the petition - the Constitution gives people the freedom to be wrong.

HundertzehnGustav

12-25-12, 07:38 AM

LOL @ this thread:har:

Sailor Steve

12-25-12, 10:45 AM

the Constitution gives people the freedom to be wrong.
I have to nitpick here. The Constitution gives nothing. It guarantees non-interference by the government in what we consider our Natural (or, if you wish, God-given) rights.

But you're right about this jackwagon, and make a good point about his right to say whatever stupid thing he likes.

CaptainHaplo

12-25-12, 11:04 AM

Nitpick all ya want, Steve. Your right of course on this, I just didn't get technical. :)

Merry Christmas!:woot:

Oberon

12-26-12, 02:51 PM

New petition urges US to keep Piers Morgan 'because UK doesn't want him'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/dec/26/petition-us-piers-morgan-uk

AVGWarhawk

12-26-12, 03:00 PM

A man without a country.

Sailor Steve

12-26-12, 03:32 PM

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-26-12, 03:40 PM

Well, it seems the British petition is mostly aimed to rile angry Americans. Of course if the US did actually deport him we would win, for the simple reason that he is still a British citizen, so unless Parliament actually took that away they'd have to take him back. :O:Could you explain that principle to Vietnam? We have couple of conmans here who they refuse to take back. :shifty:

Burglaries, robberies, assaults... they serve their prison sentences and are our problem again - rinse & repeat. No-one is dumb enough to take them. :damn:

Jimbuna

12-26-12, 03:57 PM

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 05:27 PM

Tell you what, pack all three in a box and send them down under. :03::haha:

Don't you dare!

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-26-12, 05:47 PM

Don't you dare!Don't you have territory in Antarctic? Employ them as Penguin Entertainment Specialists, more commonly know as PEST. :03:

Jimbuna

12-26-12, 06:14 PM

Don't you have territory in Antarctic? Employ them as Penguin Entertainment Specialists, more commonly know as PEST. :03:

LOL :)

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 06:16 PM

Don't you have territory in Antarctic?

We own the Antarctic. We're going to invade Africa next :O:

Jimbuna

12-26-12, 06:19 PM

We own the Antarctic. We're going to invade Africa next :O:

Dream on :smug:

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 06:22 PM

Dream on :smug:

This is the sort of attitude that insures Australian victory :woot:

Jimbuna

12-26-12, 06:26 PM

This is the sort of attitude that insures Australian victory :woot:

Then best you find a serviceable Collins Class and pack it with half a dozen commandos :03:

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 06:27 PM

Then best you find a serviceable Collins Class and pack it with half a dozen commandos :03:

:har::rotfl2::har::rotfl2::har:

Jimbuna

12-26-12, 06:30 PM

:har::rotfl2::har::rotfl2::har:

Not a laughing matter...you are one of the few westernised countries that is actually worse off militarily than the UK....and that is worrying :yep:

Sailor Steve

12-26-12, 07:29 PM

Could you explain that principle to Vietnam? We have couple of conmans here who they refuse to take back. :shifty:

Burglaries, robberies, assaults... they serve their prison sentences and are our problem again - rinse & repeat. No-one is dumb enough to take them. :damn:
Yet this article says that Finland deports many non-citizens every year. I don't understand what the problem would be with these two.
http://yle.fi/uutiset/deportations_on_the_rise_in_finland/5304949

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 09:40 PM

Not a laughing matter...you are one of the few westernised countries that is actually worse off militarily than the UK....and that is worrying :yep:

We also have one of the strongest economies in the world :yep:

And we seem to be doing a decent job in Afghanistan.

Takeda Shingen

12-26-12, 09:46 PM

This is the sort of attitude that insures Australian victory :woot:

It's ensure, not insure.

Also, on an unrelated note, don't reply to the spam threads. It only bumps them and gives the bot views. We brig them as we see them and Neal hard deletes them when he gets around.

Cybermat47

12-26-12, 09:58 PM

It's ensure, not insure.

Also, on an unrelated note, don't reply to the spam threads. It only bumps them and gives the bot views. We brig them as we see them and Neal hard deletes them when he gets around.

OK, sorry, won't happen again.

And it turns out that insure and ensure are interchangeable, but insure is more commonly used to refer to monetary compensation.

Takeda Shingen

12-26-12, 10:49 PM

And it turns out that insure and ensure are interchangeable, but insure is more commonly used to refer to monetary compensation.

No, they mean completely different things.

http://www.translegal.com/common-mistakes/ensure-vs-insure

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/assure-ensure-insure.aspx

http://www.wordsbetween.com/2009/06/insure-vs-ensure.html

http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/assurenesureglo.htm

The terms are not interchangeable.

Tribesman

12-27-12, 05:43 AM

Yet this article says that Finland deports many non-citizens every year. I don't understand what the problem would be with these two.

Two possibilities(apart from the obvous legal arguements the individuals could bring).
Deportation requires the two countries to agree on the transfer, if one of the countries refuses thats scuppered the deportation.
Free movement, Finland has both Schengen and Nordic Union so any person with a right of residence in any of the 26 countries has an automatic right to stay in Finland.

Platapus

12-27-12, 07:19 AM

And it turns out that insure and ensure are interchangeable, but insure is more commonly used to refer to monetary compensation.

:nope:

No, they mean completely different things.

The terms are not interchangeable.

:yep:

Just because some people use the terms interchangeably, does not mean it is correct. It ain't good English. :yep:

kraznyi_oktjabr

12-27-12, 08:40 AM

@Steve & Tribesman:

Here is best english language article I found of latest case. http://www.hs.fi/english/article/TV+report+Finland+wanted+to+deport+suspect+in+nigh t+club+shooting/1329104913936

Sailor Steve

12-27-12, 11:42 AM

You're right, that's ridiculous.

Olli Koskipirtti of the Finnish Immigration Service says that if a country refuses to take back a citizen who has been deported, Finland has no option other than to grant the person in question a new residence permit.
So what to do with him now? It would be nice if you could tell the country of his birth "You made him. He's your responsibility."

Jimbuna

12-27-12, 02:37 PM

Americans have started a petition to kick Piers Morgan out of the country. Meanwhile, a counter-campaign has been launched in Britain to refuse to take him back.

I hope we can meet the Yanks halfway on this, and put the bugga in the middle of the Atlantic.

Cybermat47

12-27-12, 04:11 PM

No, they mean completely different things.

http://www.translegal.com/common-mistakes/ensure-vs-insure

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/assure-ensure-insure.aspx

http://www.wordsbetween.com/2009/06/insure-vs-ensure.html

http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/assurenesureglo.htm

The terms are not interchangeable.

OK, you win!

I love grammar.

Red Triangle= Grammar

:/\\k::/\\k::/\\k::/\\k::/\\k::/\\k::/\\k:

Jimbuna

12-27-12, 04:36 PM

Good lad....learn from the lesson :sunny:

eddie

12-27-12, 04:38 PM

Jimbuna

12-27-12, 04:40 PM

Sounds good ro me!:up:

You lot get to recover the remains though :)

eddie

12-27-12, 05:06 PM

That sounds like a job for the sharks,lol

Jimbuna

12-27-12, 05:09 PM

That sounds like a job for the sharks,lol

What ya got against sharks? :)

eddie

12-27-12, 05:51 PM

Hey, we left bin Laden down there didn't we! What's one more going to hurt!:) The sharks probably won't bother either of them, will give them a stomach ache I imagine:D

Jimbuna

12-28-12, 08:03 AM

http://888webtoday.com/articles/images/binLadenShark.jpg

soopaman2

12-28-12, 08:14 AM

I will simply say this.

If we deport Piers for his views, how long will it be before my views are scrutinized?

I am a citizen, I suppose you will call for a hanging or firing squad for me?

First Amendment is meant to protect unpopular speech, just the fact this was given media coverage to the point of deportation, is apalling.

The sheer amount of rubes who knee-jerk signed it is even more apalling.

I can stand up say say, (Pretend I was a journalist, or even relevant) " Hitler had a great mustache, too bad he ruined it for anyone who wants to wear it"

I will be branded by kneejerkers a Nazi, and any other debate that comes up afterwards is moot, because of what I was branded by the media initially.

Because to the press it is not about the truth, but about how much emotion you can stir.

It is called Yellow Journalism, and it has become the status quo.

Edit: I do not agree with Mr. Morgan, but he has a right to state it in this country. DON'T TREAD ON ME!

Jimbuna

12-28-12, 08:35 AM

I'm not sure the OP meant there to be so much gravity or seriousness attached to the topic.

I tend to agree with #3

STEED

12-28-12, 10:12 AM

Takeda Shingen

12-28-12, 11:24 AM

Yeah, but it's the internet. Everybody's got to vent their outrage, even over the silly stuff. Make that especially the silly stuff.

Cybermat47

12-28-12, 04:33 PM

Yeah, but it's the internet. Everybody's got to vent their outrage, even over the silly stuff. Make that especially the silly stuff.

:har::rotfl2::har::rotfl2::har:

Jimbuna

12-28-12, 04:45 PM

:har::rotfl2::har::rotfl2::har:

My age must be interfering with my thought processes :shifty:

eddie

12-28-12, 05:58 PM

Its called a Senior Moment, I have them quite often too!:)

Jimbuna

12-28-12, 06:28 PM

Its called a Senior Moment, I have them quite often too!:)

Sounds good to me :03:

Sailor Steve

12-28-12, 06:58 PM

My age must be interfering with my thought processes :shifty:
Actually I think someone else's age is interfering with his thought processes. :sunny:

Jimbuna

12-28-12, 06:59 PM

Actually I think someone else's age is interfering with his thought processes. :sunny:
LOL :O:

Tribesman

12-29-12, 02:41 AM

What I heard was the percentage that want him out only came too 2% of the American population.
What percentage of your population want the Americans to keep him?

Cybermat47

12-29-12, 02:44 AM

My age must be interfering with my thought processes :shifty:

How?

Jimbuna

12-29-12, 07:14 AM

How?

As you grow older your brain holds so much information it takes longer to recall it....least that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it :smug:

Sailor Steve

12-29-12, 11:20 AM

As you grow older your brain holds so much information it takes longer to recall it....least that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it :smug:
There are three sure signs of old age. The first is loss of memory. I forget the other two.

Platapus

12-29-12, 12:28 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv1tMioGgXI

Senior Moments by Golf Brooks :up:

Sailor Steve

12-29-12, 01:31 PM

So what was the topic of this thread again?
:O:

Onkel Neal

01-10-13, 12:49 AM

I didn't read through this whole thread, which kinda got derailed, but wow, did you see this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XZvMwcluEg

At the risk of angering pro gun advocates, I've seldom seen someone so crazy rant for so long. Dang. Who is this dude and why is he determined to make gun owners look bad? :down:

Piers Morgan, I think I agree with you. At least, I'll hear you out.

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 12:55 AM

^^^^

Youtube's blocked on my network. Something to do with some idiot* watching it too much.

Is it the guy who talks about "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun" etc. etc.?

*Me

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:00 AM

the man is just passionate about the subject . to his discredit of course. If you cannot debate maturely and in an orderly fashion dont debate.

of course i can debate maturely

I can also shoot straight

While im passionate about the subject i wont yell, act a fool or belittle anyone.

but i will fight kill and die for my second amendment right as quickly as i would for any of the rest... that is up to and including my own countrymen.

the rest of the world probably has a hard time wrapping their head around that concept. but a storm is brewing on the horizon.

and the second amendment - like it or not - is in place so we can fight our government when - not if - when it becomes a tyranny.

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 01:03 AM

but i will fight kill and die for my second amendment right as quickly as i would for any of the rest... that is up to and including my own countrymen.

.

That's the problem I see with changing the second amendment. Hundreds of passionate gun owners will flip out and shoot at any policemen who go to their house to confiscate their guns.

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:12 AM

That's the problem I see with changing the second amendment. Hundreds of passionate gun owners will flip out and shoot at any policemen who go to their house to confiscate their guns.

When a government begins to control and dismantle the rights of its people would it not be the duty of the people to resist?

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 01:15 AM

the man is just passionate about the subject

If by passionate you mean batdung crazy, then yes he is passionate. Unless you share his belief that Piers Morgan is a mouthpiece of the New World Order that is seeking to bring about the one-world state by disarming the world's citizens and poisoning their minds with psychiatric drugs. Because that's exactly what he said.

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:19 AM

If by passionate you mean batdung crazy, then yes he is passionate.

yup... as i said he is passionate to the point of his own discredit

Unless you share his belief that Piers Morgan is a mouthpiece of the New World Order that is seeking to bring about the one-world state by disarming the world's citizens and poisoning their minds with psychiatric drugs. Because that's exactly what he said.

no... i do not hold this opinion

I hold the opinion that it is my right, duty and responsibility to be armed and i believe i should be prepared to defend those rights whatever the cost may be. i think thats a fair opinion to have.

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 01:23 AM

yup... as i said he is passionate to the point of his own discredit

no... i do not hold this opinion

I hold the opinion that it is my right, duty and responsibility to be armed and i believe i should be prepared to defend those rights whatever the cost may be. i think thats a fair opinion to have.

Ah okay. Just making sure I have the terminology down.

Left wing lunatic: Dangerous extremist

Right wing lunatic: Passionate

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 01:25 AM

When a government begins to control and dismantle the rights of its people would it not be the duty of the people to resist?

It would be. But, as an anti-gun advocate, I would say that banning guns would cause even more suffering.

It would seem we have a dilemma here. Almost all shootings are caused by criminal organizations or mentally disabled people. Criminals are, needless to say, already illegal. The route that would please most would be to improve mental healthcare, and ban mentally disabled people from having guns.

But, if we did that, we would be stripping people of a constitutional right, effectively reducing them to second-class citizens!

There is only one way to do this. I hope we find out what it is.

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:27 AM

Ah okay. Just making sure I have the terminology down.

Left wing lunatic: Dangerous extremist

Right wing lunatic: Passionate

i never associated left or right... i never said any of that :06:

edit: not sure what you want me to say Tak, i never put any politics into my comment.

i dont agree with the guy.

just saying i have rights... try to dismantle them i will fight to keep it them.

thats all i said

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 01:32 AM

i never associated left or right... i never said any of that :06:

Oh come on already. You've got an off-his-rocker conspiracy theorist screaming for 15 minutes on national television and the most you can say about him is that he is 'passionate'. If he were espousing left-wing views you would have no shortage of vitriol for him. But, he's on the side of firearms, so he gets the kid gloves.

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:35 AM

Oh come on already. You've got an off-his-rocker conspiracy theorist screaming for 15 minutes on national television and the most you can say about him is that he is 'passionate'. If he were espousing left-wing views you would have no shortage of vitriol for him. But, he's on the side of firearms, so he gets the kid gloves.

Ok...

I want to eat his babies alive and i wish his wife had breast cancer

does that ummmm.... make you feel any better?

i really dont have much of an opinion about what the guy has to say, he doesnt speak for me... he got on the show and did his own thing. whatever.

we're apparently talking about two different issues and the issue im talking about doesnt involve the guy

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 01:47 AM

You've got an off-his-rocker conspiracy theorist screaming for 15 minutes on national television

I was on TV?! :o

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:48 AM

I was on TV?! :o

no no its ok calm down

drink your juice, just relax and go play your computer games :woot:

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 01:49 AM

no no its ok calm down

drink your juice, just relax and go play your computer games :woot:

OK.

GoldenRivet

01-10-13, 01:50 AM

LMAO :haha:

TFatseas

01-10-13, 02:40 AM

Great video on why I have no respect for Piers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRJ0ls_W9XM

He openly misinforms to fit his agenda.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 02:58 AM

If by passionate you mean batdung crazy, then yes he is passionate. Unless you share his belief that Piers Morgan is a mouthpiece of the New World Order that is seeking to bring about the one-world state by disarming the world's citizens and poisoning their minds with psychiatric drugs. Because that's exactly what he said.
But don't forget the follow up to the circus freak show, he said that he is now expecting to be assasinated by the NYPD and the mafia which is run by Bloomberg.

I hold the opinion that it is my right, duty and responsibility to be armed and i believe i should be prepared to defend those rights whatever the cost may be. i think thats a fair opinion to have.
Whatever the cost may be is not a fair opinion it is a rather silly opinion if you look at the costs.
Allowing crazy loons unfettered access to firearms is one of the major costs you are happy to be paying

It would be. But, as an anti-gun advocate, I would say that banning guns would cause even more suffering.

What do you mean by anti-gun and what do you mean by banning?

Great video on why I have no respect for Piers.

Reality check fails on a scale that is equal to Morgan.
He openly misinforms to fit his agenda.
And you cite Faux news which is openly misinforming to tell you another network is misinforming?

Cybermat47

01-10-13, 03:04 AM

What do you mean by anti-gun and what do you mean by banning?

I mean that I think that guns should be banned outright. But I'm also aware that, while the sensible gun owners will hand over their guns if guns are banned, some would shoot at any and all people who went over to them to confiscate their guns.

TFatseas

01-10-13, 03:10 AM

Reality check fails on a scale that is equal to Morgan.

And you cite Faux news which is openly misinforming to tell you another network is misinforming?

Cool, more fallacies. You argued nothing in the video, and attacked me.

Please, tell me how and what in that video was wrong, I'd be more than happy to hear it.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 03:10 AM

I mean that I think that guns should be banned outright.
Why?

Tribesman

01-10-13, 03:17 AM

Cool, more fallacies.
You are the one presenting fallacies, linking to a media piece doesn't show how bad morgan is it shows how bad the media can be.
Jones did a better job of demolishing Morgans credibility, but that job also includes Murdochs empire on a far greater scale.

Please, tell me how and what in that video was wrong, I'd be more than happy to hear it.
Check the statistics and more importantly check their nature in relation to each other.
Even the main source cited on Fox puts a bloody big disclaimer on it.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 03:38 AM

And you cite Faux news which is openly misinforming to tell you another network is misinforming?
They cited a British source. Is it accurate or not?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html#ixzz2HQDkC3re

No, make that two.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list#data

You dismiss Ben Swann and Fox News out of hand, using the usual demeaning joke name, but it would seem he has his facts straight on this.

TarJak

01-10-13, 05:10 AM

http://888webtoday.com/articles/images/binLadenShark.jpg

Incorrect:
http://www.aquaexplorers.com/fossil%20mike%20mcmeekin%20(7).jpg:know:

Tribesman

01-10-13, 05:41 AM

They cited a British source. Is it accurate or not?

Daily Mail:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::hah a:
hmmmm...2009?
Even better they go back to 1997 as a measure even though that country completely changed their methods in a manner which means Britians figures cannot be compared with Britains figures.

No, make that two.

Where is Britain on that table and why is data it from 2005?
Fox claimed 2011 and morgan claimed last year...does that make it irrelevant to the claims?

You dismiss Ben Swann and Fox News out of hand
No I dismiss them after listening to what they are saying.
They are talking crap just like Morgan was talking crap.
Therefore they do not show how morgan was misinforming they are just misinforming.

but it would seem he has his facts straight on this
Despite the obvious problems with different years different methodology and different categorisation which puts them all back to the academic level of back of the envolope calculations there are some glaringly obvious reasons why the misrepresentation is an epic fail.
Two further examples
Yemen:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:eve n a person bathed in ignorance should be able to see why you cannot use statistics from that country.
3 Carribean nations? don't they manage to destroy the whole supposed basis of the 2nd amendment?:hmmm:

Seriously Steve, you think would I dismiss Fox out of hand just because it is Murdoch any more than I would dismiss Morgan simply because he is a prat.
Hey I even read your Daily Fail before dismissing it just to double check that it was talking rubbish as usual.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 05:54 AM

Hey Steve, as a bonus question how does the politicians made up figures from the second article link directly back to Ben Swanns boss?

Onkel Neal

01-10-13, 09:18 AM

Tribesman

01-10-13, 09:36 AM

Yeah, and HITLER! :haha:

Thanks, that leads to another line of bull Jones trotted out.

Poor old uncle adolf abolished the very tight gun controls that existed during the Weimar republic.
Hitler wasn't someone that took away peoples guns, he took away the governments restrictions on firearms.
Hitler was a gun nut:rotfl2:

To be fair,
Taking guns from the mentally unstable, stopping gun sales that do not do background checks for criminals and issueing licenses that have to be renewed so ongoing things which people agree should curtail your rights to a gun like felony convictions and mental problem can be checked.
Sorry I don't see the equation with the new world order global conspiracy nut who thinks the chinese civil war was won because only one side had guns

JU_88

01-10-13, 10:21 AM

Wow I just saw the AJ rant on Peirs Morgan, painful to watch (probably because I can't stand either of them) :D
My opinion, Im in two minds about gun ownership, it has both advantages and disadvantages. But I reckon that in the current climate Americans should probably hang on their guns, since by handing them in now you'd putting complete faith in the frederal goverment, to: a) protect you, b) not screw you over.
I wouldnt bet on either.

Penguin

01-10-13, 11:40 AM

My brain hurts after watching the Morgan-Jones "debate". :dead: When you run out of arguments, mock the accent of the other. :nope:
Considering Jones' loudmouth monologue, I will never complain again about the discussion culture in GT.

Great video on why I have no respect for Piers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRJ0ls_W9XM

He openly misinforms to fit his agenda.

I wouldn't use the word 'he' for Fox News.
Just one example: check out how they lower the American numbers by using the criteria of justifiable homicides, but when they cite the British numers: nothing like that. It is a good example how they manipulate statistics, very obvious. Any first-grader would be thrown out of class for doing so. One law for the things they endorse, another law for the others.

Thanks, that leads to another line of bull Jones trotted out.

Poor old uncle adolf abolished the very tight gun controls that existed during the Weimar republic.
Hitler wasn't someone that took away peoples guns, he took away the governments restrictions on firearms.
Hitler was a gun nut:rotfl2:

Well, this one of the two points that Jones' got semi-right, besides the point that there have been more towers in New York. The 3rd Reich did indeed had less strict gun laws than Weimar had. However you also have to take into consideration who was eligible to execute the right of gun ownership. Only people who were not in opposition to the party line or otherwise seen as Untermenschen. People who were not worthy in the eyes of the Nazis had no chance to obtain a firearm legally. A major part of the political opposition were disarmed and/or arrested after the Nazis took power. Many members of the KPD, parts of the SPD and others had (illegal obtained) firearms when Hitler took power.
Btw, this is also an example that an armed population alone is no guarantee to stop tyranny. In 1933 there would have been good chances that an armed resurrection would have been succesfull, one year later not so much.

Here is a pretty good summary in English about gun politics in 1930s Germany: http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf The article is certainly biased when you check out Halbrook's background, but the sources he quotes are legitimate. Just check out the facts that are documented, in other points he just makes up things to fit his agenda. Like I said before: there was no real lack of weapons among the Communists (and among the Nazis too) in the Weimar Republic, contrary to what he claims on page 487.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 01:48 PM

Daily Mail:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::hah a:
hmmmm...2009?
Even better they go back to 1997 as a measure even though that country completely changed their methods in a manner which means Britians figures cannot be compared with Britains figures.
Can you show that the numbers are wrong?

Where is Britain on that table and why is data it from 2005?
Fox claimed 2011 and morgan claimed last year...does that make it irrelevant to the claims?
Can you show that the numbers are wrong?

No I dismiss them after listening to what they are saying.
They are talking crap just like Morgan was talking crap.
Therefore they do not show how morgan was misinforming they are just misinforming.
Can you show that the numbers are wrong?

Despite the obvious problems with different years different methodology and different categorisation which puts them all back to the academic level of back of the envolope calculations there are some glaringly obvious reasons why the misrepresentation is an epic fail.
You make sweeping dismissals, but can you show that the numbers are wrong?

Two further examples
Yemen:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:eve n a person bathed in ignorance should be able to see why you cannot use statistics from that country.
3 Carribean nations? don't they manage to destroy the whole supposed basis of the 2nd amendment?:hmmm:
But can you show that the numbers are wrong?

Seriously Steve, you think would I dismiss Fox out of hand just because it is Murdoch any more than I would dismiss Morgan simply because he is a prat.
Hey I even read your Daily Fail before dismissing it just to double check that it was talking rubbish as usual.
You call it rubbish, but you don't even try to show that the numbers are wrong. In fact, all you do is make high-handed, arrogant, dismissive talk.

Please show where the numbers are wrong.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 01:49 PM

Hey Steve, as a bonus question how does the politicians made up figures from the second article link directly back to Ben Swanns boss?
How does anything you say link to anything of any relevance? Please show where the numbers are wrong.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 01:55 PM

My brain hurts after watching the Morgan-Jones "debate". :dead: When you run out of arguments, mock the accent of the other. :nope:
I completely agree. Jones is a blight on pretty much everything.

Just one example: check out how they lower the American numbers by using the criteria of justifiable homicides, but when they cite the British numers: nothing like that. It is a good example how they manipulate statistics, very obvious. Any first-grader would be thrown out of class for doing so. One law for the things they endorse, another law for the others.
So you believe that justifiable homicides should be counted as handgun murders? That, I think, is more bizarre than what you're condemning. How many violent crimes in Britain are justifiable homicides? How many shootings? How many muggings?

Tribesman

01-10-13, 03:28 PM

How does anything you say link to anything of any relevance?
Follow the words, it is easy.

Please show where the numbers are wrong
Mixed years cannot match for a measure, different methodologies cannot match for a measure, Yemen cannot be included at all in figures due to the nature of the state for the past 20+years, attempting to do so is making a misrepresentation.
Though the most blatent example of misrepresentation occurs right at the start with the different British figures where they make a misrepresentation to show that CNN made a misrepresentation with their British figures.

You call it rubbish, but you don't even try to show that the numbers are wrong.
Look at the source of the numbers the Daily Mail is using.
Is it another case of you not reading what your links actually say?
It really is a classic Daily Mail, they build up the story, then tucked away is the detail that says it isn't really a real story

You really are having difficulty Steve, you follow with a good example of the difficulty you are having.....
So you believe that justifiable homicides should be counted as handgun murders?
What he said was very simple, I cannot believe you are able to so badly comprehend such a simple statement.
The statement only covers the massaging of figures to make a misrepresntation which was present in the piece. For balance the same occured in the CNN piece where nutcase removed one section of figures he wanted to compare while not removing the corresponding section from the other figures.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 03:37 PM

BTW Steve how about an answer to the bonus question.

Hey Steve, as a bonus question how does the politicians made up figures from the second article link directly back to Ben Swanns boss?
You do understand the actual source you used and what those numbers were don't you?:hmmm:
It is all in the article if you piece it together:yep:

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 03:40 PM

Follow the words, it is easy.
Your words were all talk, and no facts. There is nothing to follow.

Mixed years cannot match for a measure, different methodologies cannot match for a measure, Yemen cannot be included at all in figures due to the nature of the state for the past 20+years, attempting to do so is making a misrepresentation.
Though the most blatent example of misrepresentation occurs right at the start with the different British figures where they make a misrepresentation to show that CNN made a misrepresentation with their British figures.
So you can talk a good line, but have nothing to actually show.

Look at the source of the numbers the Daily Mail is using.
Is it another case of you not reading what your links actually say?
It really is a classic Daily Mail, they build up the story, then tucked away is the detail that says it isn't really a real story
But you can't actually show this detail? I repeat: Can you actually show where the numbers are wrong? So far all you've done is spin.

You really are having difficulty Steve, you follow with a good example of the difficulty you are having.....
So actually show something.

What he said was very simple, I cannot believe you are able to so badly comprehend such a simple statement.
The statement only covers the massaging of figures to make a misrepresntation which was present in the piece. For balance the same occured in the CNN piece where nutcase removed one section of figures he wanted to compare while not removing the corresponding section from the other figures.
So show where the numbers are wrong. So far you've done nothing but yammer.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 03:41 PM

BTW Steve how about an answer to the bonus question.

You do understand the actual source you used and what those numbers were don't you?:hmmm:
It is all in the article if you piece it together:yep:
So you can yet again do a lot of talking, but have absolutely nothing to back it up. Why don't you put up or shut up? Show where the numbers are wrong.

Penguin

01-10-13, 03:57 PM

I completely agree. Jones is a blight on pretty much everything.

Reminded me of the words of some geezer I read somewhere: "It's not what you say, it's how you say it!" :O: Well, in this case there was also a remarkable incoherence in what he said...

So you believe that justifiable homicides should be counted as handgun murders? That, I think, is more bizarre than what you're condemning. How many violent crimes in Britain are justifiable homicides? How many shootings? How many muggings?

No, this was not my point.
Fox reports 8000something gun homicides, then subtracts the number of justifiable homicides. This is legit. It is standard procedure when a alleged homicide happens, that the authorities examine the circumstances and when the state attorney comes to the conclusion the homicide was justified, the homicide charges are dropped.
However when they show the British numbers, they do not mention how they come to 59. Is this the number before or after justifiable homicides are subtracted?
Contrary to the US, where they show the total homicide numbers, they do also not show Britain's total numbers (which would be 550 according to the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18900384) - multiply the numbers times 5 to compare it with the US).
After this they mention that 59 is not the number that Morgan keeps citing, they ven put up a text."Not the number Pierce Morgan Claims". A nice way to emphasize: this guy lies. They don't even mention that the number Jones' was claiming (11thousand something) also differs from the numbers which Fox has shown. A clear bias.
Another example of dishonest reporting is that they say that a correlation between gun wonership and the murder rate is not given, which is true as there are many other factors involved. However this also contradicts Jones' statement, who claims that the violent crime rate in the US dropped because the Assault Weapons Ban ran out. Just simple math: if guns (min) has no relation to crime (min), guns (max) also does not relate to crime (min).

Tribesman

01-10-13, 03:59 PM

Your words were all talk, and no facts. There is nothing to follow.

Do you understand the nature of crime figures?
Do you understand why(all talk) they cary a disclaimer?

So you can talk a good line, but have nothing to actually show.

All that is needed is already provided.
You kindly supplemented what was already provided to further reinforce my point.

But you can't actually show this detail?
Its all in your link
Your other link does the same but differently.
You have already shown it but don't know what you have shown.

Read your own links, watch the Fox and CNN links. Compare and contrast.
Do I have to remind you to read what I wrote again and again and again until you actually read it, all the detail is there.

So actually show something.

Done

So show where the numbers are wrong. So far you've done nothing but yammer.
Wow:doh:
Would you like to read what your statment relates to?
As a clue I would suggest that line should relate to the specific quote you use.

Would you like a date again darling? thats a funny thing with numbers in it, different numbers mean different things, complicated isn't it...or is it really simple.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 04:06 PM

No, this was not my point.

Similar to what jones attempted when he wanted to remove 75% of one set of figures from the US total but didn't attempt to remove the same set of figures from the UK total.

edit to add. "they do also not show Britain's total numbers. "
Your link doesn't show Britains numbers, those are for England and Wales. Other parts of Britain have different numbers, they also have different laws(incl. different firearms laws) and different methods of recording the numbers.
Crime statistics can be a bugger can't they, that is why compilations and studies carry disclaimers

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 04:08 PM

At this point, Tribesman, I would suggest that you either show some figures to back up your claims or back out of the discussion all together. You wouldn't want me to think that you were just trolling, would you? Because that would be a bad thing.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 04:21 PM

At this point, Tribesman, I would suggest that you either show some figures to back up your claims or back out of the discussion all together.
Item 1. last year
Item 2. 2011
Item 3. 2009
Item 4. 2007
The figures don't compute do they, they are all different.
As a bonus they all use different sources as well as different years and each source uses different methods for counting.
Simple isn't it.
Though the 2009 figures are the most dubious source due to their nature and what they are trying to portray over a 12 year period.

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 04:23 PM

Item 1. last year
Item 2. 2011
Item 3. 2009
Item 4. 2007
The figures don't compute do they, they are all different.
As a bonus they all use different sources as well as different years and each source uses different methods for counting.
Simple isn't it.
Though the 2009 figures are the most dubious source due to their nature and what they are trying to portray over a 12 year period.

None of that makes any sense at all, nor does it have any citation. Stop trolling. Last warning.

The Management

Julhelm

01-10-13, 04:38 PM

Alex Jones is pretty ridiculous and I can't see how anyone can still take him seriously.

Anyway, I'm inclined towards the same ideas Gerald Celente (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3pDi_jrrbw) of Trends Research put forth, in that all this violence is largely a symptom of the dehumanisation of modern society and overprevalence of prescription psychopharmacy.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 04:43 PM

None of that makes any sense at all, nor does it have any citation. Stop trolling. Last warning.

Follow the tangent of the topic, it starts from this line
Reality check fails on a scale that is equal to Morgan.

Item 1. last year...the CNN piece
Item 2. 2011....the "reality check" Fox piece that line addresses
Item 3. 2009....Steves Daily Mail piece
Item 4. 2007.....Steves small arms survey from the Guardian

Simple isn't it.
post #88 does not show CNN to be incorrect it just makes the same mistake, post #94 does not show it to be incorrect either as it makes the same mistake twice.
If you want to show how Morgan misrepresented the figures you have to use the same figures from the same year using the same method.

Supplying other figures does nothing, the best way of showing Morgan was misrepresting is by simply saying that the US figures and the UK figures simply cannot be compared as they are crime statistics and come with a great big disclaimer saying they cannot be compared to others from different sources.

In case you missed it the Mail figures are made up by a political party trying to show how bad another political party is.

Sailor Steve

01-10-13, 04:49 PM

Do you understand the nature of crime figures?
Do you understand why(all talk) they cary a disclaimer?
So you still have nothing to show.

All that is needed is already provided.
You kindly supplemented what was already provided to further reinforce my point.
Talk is cheap. You still haven't shown anything.

Its all in your link
Your other link does the same but differently.
You have already shown it but don't know what you have shown.
Then instead of prattling, point out exactly where in my link it is shown. You won't even do that.

Read your own links, watch the Fox and CNN links. Compare and contrast.
Do I have to remind you to read what I wrote again and again and again until you actually read it, all the detail is there.
So quit blathering and point it out.

Done
When? You have referred over and over again to those links, saying they already show it, but you can't actually point it out.

Wow:doh:
Would you like to read what your statment relates to?
As a clue I would suggest that line should relate to the specific quote you use.
Yes, I would like to read it. But you still haven't shown a single thing. All you've done is comment on the same thing without actually pointing it out.

Would you like a date again darling?
So when you have nothing real to add, you go back to trolling.

thats a funny thing with numbers in it, different numbers mean different things, complicated isn't it...or is it really simple.
So show us some numbers. You've still done nothing but critcize. But you haven't shown any numbers. You've commented on the numbers in the link, but you haven't once shown where they are wrong. In fact, you haven't done anything so far but fill the thread with hot air.

No please show something real or quit playing your games.

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 04:55 PM

In case you missed it the Mail figures are made up by a political party trying to show how bad another political party is.

Just like you do every day on this forum, right?

Penguin

01-10-13, 04:57 PM

edit to add. "they do also not show Britain's total numbers. "
Your link doesn't show Britains numbers, those are for England and Wales. Other parts of Britain have different numbers, they also have different laws(incl. different firearms laws) and different methods of recording the numbers.
Crime statistics can be a bugger can't they, that is why compilations and studies carry disclaimers

You're right about it, missed the huge fonts in the headline. ;)

When checking the link again, I found a good example of different methods: in this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15445090) link about Scotland's gun crime, we see that the Scottish police also puts crimes committed with air guns into the firearm crime category.

Tribesman

01-10-13, 05:08 PM

So you still have nothing to show.

Answer the question.
I can quote your first link if you like in case you missed it.
"These figures are misleading.
Levels of police recorded crime statistics from different countries are simply not comparable since they are affected by many factors, for example the recording of violent crime in other countries may not include behaviour that we would categorise as violent crime."

Pretty simple no?
Did you also note that it was a politician gathering data from many differnet sources that are incomparable?

I could also point out your second link, but as I have already said it doesn't even have any UK numbers and you have refused to even acknoledge that very basic point.
Pretty hard to dispute Morgans UK figures from an article that is 5 years out and doesn't even feature the same country isn't it.

So when you have nothing real to add, you go back to trolling.

No Steve, a date is a date is a date, if you want to compare a years figures then they need to have a date that matches

Tribesman

01-10-13, 05:14 PM

You're right about it, missed the huge fonts in the headline. ;)

When checking the link again, I found a good example of different methods: in this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15445090) link about Scotland's gun crime, we see that the Scottish police also puts crimes committed with air guns into the firearm crime category.
Didn't you get the memo, it isn't about different figures and different methods, its about trolling apparently.

Penguin that is an important distinction on the wider topic, all too often you hear Britain has banned guns or Britain has banned handguns which follows with crime statistics which may or not cover the area in question as different parts of Britain have different laws and different ways of counting crime, plus of course Britain hasn't banned guns or even banned handguns.

Takeda Shingen

01-10-13, 05:16 PM

Didn't you get the memo, it isn't about different figures and different methods, its about trolling apparently

Funny, I don't remember you ever presenting facts and figures, just volumes of open mockery featuring run-on sentences, no punctuation or capitalization and lots and lots of emoticons. A lot like yubba, come to think of it.

Yep, that's trolling. If you don't like the label, there is only one person who can change it. You are in charge of you.

Herr_Pete

01-10-13, 11:30 PM

Retrieving facts from the Daily Mail is actually bloody hilarious :haha:

This really has made my day :up:

Tribesman

01-11-13, 04:51 AM

Funny, I don't remember you ever presenting facts and figures
I pointed out the fact that if you look at the two first sources the figures from 2011 are not the figures from 2012.
That was followed by someone demanding to know why the figures from 2011 were wrong and supplying figures from 2009&2007 for a bonus.
The fact was again pointed out that the figures were from the wrong years.
That was followed by repeated demands to know what was wrong with the figures.
I can repeat endlessly the fact that the figures are from the wrong years but until Steve realises that the problem with the figures is that they are the wrong years to counter the initial claim then it goes in the same loop of him demanding an answer to a question that has already been answered many times.

It is rather like the gun topic where he was going on and on about a statement on ALL guns and demanding an answer even though no one apart from himself (and one person in his link) had made such a declaration.

Retrieving facts from the Daily Mail is actually bloody hilarious
Not so, if you read it then like most daily mail stories it does state that the story is not really the story and the "facts" are not really facts.
The details are there but people tend to miss them very easily.
Though that particular story was easy to understand for what it was due to remembering the massive stink the Conservative party "study" created at the time it was released.

Takeda Shingen

01-11-13, 09:07 AM

I pointed out the fact that if you look at the two first sources the figures from 2011 are not the figures from 2012.
That was followed by someone demanding to know why the figures from 2011 were wrong and supplying figures from 2009&2007 for a bonus.
The fact was again pointed out that the figures were from the wrong years.
That was followed by repeated demands to know what was wrong with the figures.
I can repeat endlessly the fact that the figures are from the wrong years but until Steve realises that the problem with the figures is that they are the wrong years to counter the initial claim then it goes in the same loop of him demanding an answer to a question that has already been answered many times.

It is rather like the gun topic where he was going on and on about a statement on ALL guns and demanding an answer even though no one apart from himself (and one person in his link) had made such a declaration.

Polemics are not a substitute for statistics. You said that you disagree with the statistics presented. You said it over and over again, to the point that when asked to counter with your own sets of statistics you continued to repeat yourself. That, a vaild argument does not make. So, as I have said over and over again, either link to statistics that are contrary or get out. Time to back it up.

I will say no more on the matter. Hopefully you'll understand what I really mean by that.

Onkel Neal

01-11-13, 09:41 AM

Pleaze Stop quoting

Dowly

01-11-13, 10:42 AM

Pleaze Stop quoting

Ok! :O:

Tribesman

01-11-13, 12:43 PM

You said that you disagree with the statistics presented.
No, I said the statistics were two different sets so didn't match so they didn't prove any manipulation in that manner.
To prove the manipulation by the parties involved then both those sources need to be the same.(apart from the very obvious manipulation myself and Penguin pointed out)
So instead of asking me for statistics ask Fox and CNN to both use the same statistics.

You said it over and over again, to the point that when asked to counter with your own sets of statistics you continued to repeat yourself.
Because you even now still fail to grasp that it was the use of different sets of statistics that was the issue.
Providing my own different of statistics just adds another problem to the issue it doesn't provide an answer.

So, as I have said over and over again, either link to statistics that are contrary or get out.
Which just shows that you really are confused.
However it would be interesting to link to the statistics Morgan used, as there are no formal statistics finalised yet for last year.

Time to back it up.

The figures are from different years, it really is that simple.

Sailor Steve

01-11-13, 12:54 PM

So you continue to play the same game, and you still have nothing to offer but rhetoric and blather. You need to actually produce something of substance.

Sorry I didn't quote you, but we were just asked publicly to not do that anymore.

Tribesman

01-11-13, 01:04 PM

The substance is all there Steve.
Two parties used different sets of figures and one party claimed their figures proved the other wrong.
It didn't prove anything
The fact that you seem to think it is something else is your mistake.

Pretty similar to your mistake about removing one section of figures which you somehow read as "handguns".

Sailor Steve

01-11-13, 01:05 PM

You keep saying the same thing, but you still don't show any proof the numbers are wrong, which is all I asked for in the first place.

Tribesman

01-11-13, 01:11 PM

but you still don't show any proof the numbers are wrong
They are from different years.:doh:
They cannot be right if they are not from the same year.
You cannot say Morgan manipulated the murder figure from 2012 by providing a murder figure from 2011 which is exactly what they do on that link.

soopaman2

01-11-13, 01:22 PM

I am not an Alex Jones fan, but if you sifted through some of his lunacy, and annoyance factor, he kinda ran all over ol' Piers.

I made this point before (and got critisized for it) but foreigners can never understand our gun culture, they find it silly, just like we find your royal family silly, because it isn't a part of our respective cultures.

Alex Jones is a lunatic, yes, rarely makes sense, but one thing he said was "If they try to take away guns, then you will see another 1776"

I hate to agree with a tinfoil hat wearer, but hey, he has a point. Piers didn't accept it one bit though.

Alex even called him a Redcoat at one point, I spit chocolate milk onto my keyboard

Tribesman

01-11-13, 01:44 PM

made this point before (and got critisized for it) but foreigners can never understand our gun culture
You got chastised for it because it makes no sense.
You cannot make a blanket statement about billions of people not understanding a culture that the 300 millions can't even agree on.

Hottentot

01-11-13, 01:56 PM

they find it silly, just like we find your royal family silly, because it isn't a part of our respective cultures.

Nor is it part of mine, yet I don't find it silly at all. How come?

TarJak

01-11-13, 03:01 PM

Because you don't fit into any sweeping generalisation like I do.:O: Oh and unfortunately I still have a Royal family despite a few lame attempts to get rid of them.

I find the whole thread to be fairly pointless given that the US has proven time and again that its government and the NRA really doesn't care that much if its children are killed by maniacs with semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines.

That is what the argument is really about isn't it?:hmmm:

Buddahaid

01-11-13, 03:26 PM

This argument is as old as Bobby Kennedy's assassination. What has 45 years of gun control accomplished? The answer is very little so the solution perhaps lies elsewhere? I'm sick and tired of having my freedoms impinged on because of a few bad apples! It's always throw out all the apples because there could be a rotten one in the basket. :stare:

TFatseas

01-11-13, 03:31 PM

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1117_10151206449077596_1261341270_n.jpg

Takeda Shingen

01-11-13, 03:36 PM

Cybermat47

01-11-13, 04:27 PM

:o:o:o:o

Takeda, why are you torturing us with these images!? I thought you were supposed to help.

geetrue

01-11-13, 05:33 PM

I see you guys stopped quoting each other ...
you must of met your quota :haha::woot::hmmm:

Tak I'm shocked at your posting that picture ...
I would report you, but your the mod man.

Report yourself right now or at least edit it :o

Takeda Shingen

01-11-13, 06:06 PM

There's no nudity. No gore either. No violence, for that matter Frankly, you see a whole lot worse in the funny picture thread. :-?

Hottentot

01-12-13, 12:40 AM

I just hope that the non-Americans on the forum realize that not all of us [Americans] are like the above picture, despite statements by certain individuals who try to place us all in the same camp. Many of us are just as baffled by gun culture as you are.

[Gasp] What are you saying?! So "culture" is not, after all, a magic word that you can hide behind, stick your fingers in your ears and shout "LAALAALAA MY CULTURE MY COUNTRY WE AND YOU BARRIER" when you can't stand behind your own arguments as an individual?!

Who would have thought?! You have shattered my neat black and white world, Takeda Shingen, and for that I am going to sue you for $1,000,000,000,000,000,000. As an American I'm sure you can appreciate me doing this: ridiculous court cases are a well known part of your culture after all, aren't they?

TFatseas

01-12-13, 12:51 AM

I just hope that the non-Americans on the forum realize that not all of us [Americans] are like the above picture, despite statements by certain individuals who try to place us all in the same camp. Many of us are just as baffled by gun culture as you are.

And, how necessarily does that guy represent the gun culture? All I see is some basement dwelling weirdo.

Stealhead

01-12-13, 01:28 AM

http://thejesuscodpiece.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/fat_hairy_guy_on_bed_with_guns.jpg

I just hope that the non-Americans on the forum realize that not all of us [Americans] are like the above picture, despite statements by certain individuals who try to place us all in the same camp. Many of us are just as baffled by gun culture as you are.

So the dude likes guns,Guitar Hero,Rock Star,tightie whities(or in this case blackies),and mullets.If he is not harming anyone I fail to see what the big deal is.

HunterICX

01-12-13, 04:39 AM

http://thejesuscodpiece.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/fat_hairy_guy_on_bed_with_guns.jpg

I just hope that the non-Americans on the forum realize that not all of us [Americans] are like the above picture, despite statements by certain individuals who try to place us all in the same camp. Many of us are just as baffled by gun culture as you are.

Ehm, we appreciate you finally show yourself on the forum... but mate as fellow moderator I have to tell you that it belongs in the ''Subsim Forum regulars' bios, pics, 'how you found Subsim'' thread

HunterICX

Méo

01-12-13, 05:11 AM

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1117_10151206449077596_1261341270_n.jpg

I'm gonna let the stats talk:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Tribesman

01-12-13, 05:25 AM

I'm gonna let the stats talk:

So are you saying the last quarter of that picture should be bigger than the other 3 segments combined to give a more accurate representation?

Thats handy data, a single country using uniform statistics from a single year compiled by one agency using one method.

Onkel Neal

01-12-13, 08:58 AM

[

I just hope that the non-Americans on the forum realize that not all of us [Americans] are like the above picture, despite statements by certain individuals who try to place us all in the same camp. Many of us are just as baffled by gun culture as you are.

Yeah, that guy is a freak. I own a few guns and I have been a shooter for a long time. I'm not much of a hunter (I have been hunting many times, shot few animals, too lazy to clean them, prefer sitting in the woods quietly and reading a book, watching the deer walk by...:88)). I don't get it when people abhor guns as evil sentient beings, but I don't get the desire to celebrate guns and worship them, either.

That kind of devotion is sorely misplaced when it is wasted on anything other than motorcycles.:cool: