Konichiwa, Kisako!
Afternoon, Mum!
1451edt
===
m'sieu ledingue:

i'm lost w/this now, dont know what you're saying.
somewhere in there, i'd spoken of the polish death camps, being there due to the very high concentration [yes, pre-WWII] of jewish people in poland...as opposed to the Nazis palming off the 'blame' on poland. under then-contemporary circumstances, what did the Nazis have to worry about? or so they thought.
=
"blame the whole east of europe"...

???
...because "the whole east of europe" was engaging in the 'final solution', _independently_, of their own volition? really?
=
The Nazis had a different, spelled-out agenda than that of the communists. you think not?

Under [most notably] Stalin,the communists had their own way of _not_ being bonafide communists, in the totalitarian state.

but we digress...
==
if you are saying a sexless marriage of over a decade was comparable to one's 'terminal virginity'...well yeah, 'better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all' or however that line went.[10-q, mr shakespeare-sp?]
presuming the marriage had _ever_ included sex, before the lights went out.
=====
Kim,

senor bettergoode's 'poem' involved the armed killing the unarmed, and the imminently-slain daughter reaching in the drawer for the gun which was no longer there...these things due to mandatory registration/gun control/blah
just a mite sensationalistic, and a weird reaxion to the lyrics i posted [at USC]....lol, made for a strange week.

Kisako, darlin,
all this gun stuff...oy and oy again -_-
real 'gun contol', much less their outright abolishing/prohibition, in the U. S. of A?
have fun trying.
and as you said about the black market, how many times does prohibition have to fail?
have fun trying.

would i like there to be a world w/o these guns?
sure.
can we get rid of the nukes too?
and can we cure cancer too?
and can i have a cookie too?

cue: "i'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony" = New Seekers, '70
(you know, that coca-cola commercial -_-)
===
but it's as you said, K-san, about guns in your everyday life, because of where you are.
that isnt a part of the everyday lives of Kim et moi.

sumimasen, it started to be like a TV western, images blurred together...
'sidearm slung low': your cowboy 6-gun worn very low on your hip, the better to "draw, partner."

but it's one thing for me to be irreverent, when for you it's Life/or/Death...this bothered me later, Kisako.
==
Best of, mum...
==
{+3sk}

Hi, a "foe-in-arms" Kim:o),
* Vermont and people alowed to carry guns - lowest crime rate- therefore prohibition doesn't work....
If it is a joke, You are right, - people with handguns is a sure sign that prohibition doesn't work;o)
When and where any prohibition worked? (Exclude Mao China with its "rehabilitation-recreation" camps idea of control.)

* What is the average standard of living in Vermont compared with other states, inner cities etc.- ??????
One of the best overall in the US. If You imply that, being the poor is the reason for gun control to prevent crimes, involving use of firearms, then it is the overall system fault to allow the poor to exist, or to become one, not the handgun. A handgun ban will not provide them with jobs (in fact, it will produce more candidates for the poor), or prevent homicides. What You imply?

* Plus if this is all about taking guns away from innocent "sports-enthusisasts",[...]
This is about preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals to
purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, sports, or no sports. BTH, "taking away" means confiscation.

* what was Better's poem about?
A silly pro-gun prop. Nothing to win my support. He is a poor Byron and cannot argue.

* (how realistic are their fears? - it seems the NRA is doing a good job of playing on people's fears".)
An unjustified attack on the 3.5 mln.-member NRA, same as other outlandish blah of moralists, - NRA promotes cooperation and works with law-enforcement, namely, BATF, for instance, the 1986 prohibiting "the manufacture and importation, for private use, of handgun bullets made of special, hard metals and (in a 1994 amendment) specially-jacketed lead bullets. These bullets were invented for use by law enforcement
and military personnel." NRA helped draft the 1986 provisions and didn't object to the 1994 amendment.

* Where do the illigitimate weapons come from?
Trafficking, like drug-trafficking, according to the US Treasury. I hope it is not the hint at NRA as a "sponsor" of illegal guns. Under current law supported by the NRA, it is a federal felony to transfer a gun to anyone, who does not reside in the same state (5 years in prison per gun). It is a federal felony to transfer a firearm or ammunition to a convicted felon, a fugitive from justice, or substance abuser (10 years in prison per gun). It is a federal felony to transfer a gun to any individual, knowing that it will be used to commit a violent crime (10 years in prison per gun).

* By secret shipment from Cuba?
What about Mexico?

* [...] no, they were originally sold as legit "sports equipment"!
Depends. And not all was/is sold as "..." - a lot is smuggled in.

* Limiting the supply combined with laws making it an offence to carry or own weapons, etc. ( then enforce those laws)
All in all this is a prerequisite for an establishing in the end of a totalitarian state. An earlier mention of illegal firearms, that looks like tying them to legal owners, implies that, 60 mln. of US citizens owning 230 mln. pieces of firearms are walking criminals in waiting for the chance. Limiting the supply will bump into the interstate commerce. [...] laws making it an offence [...] will run in contravention to the Constitution and will be "overuled" by the Surpeme Court. ( then enforce those laws) is what happened in the GB and scares the US public.
"Gun owners know further that the registration and licensing of America's 60-65 million gun owners and their 230 million firearms would require creation of a huge bureaucracy at tremendous taxpayer cost, without any tangible anti-crime benefit. Gun registration is, of course, hardly new, and neither are its widely recognized dangers. In 1975, Second Amendment champion Sen.James A. McClure (R-ID) said: "Gun registration is the first step toward ultimate and total confiscation, the first step in a complete destruction of a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights." When Sen. McClure sponsored the Firearm Owners' Protection Act in 1986, he made sure that it included a prohibition against the federal government keeping a national registry of gun owners. Similar prohibitive language appears in the Brady Act and in annual appropriations bills.
Not only legislators such as Sen. McClure recognize gun registration's inherent evil. In 1975 testimony before the House Subcommittee on Crime, anti-gun advocate Charles Morgan, director of the Washington, D.C., office of the American Civil Liberties Union stated: "I have not one doubt, even if I am in agreement with the National Rifle Association, that that kind of record-keeping procedure is the first step to eventual confiscation under one administration or another."
Registration lists have led to gun confiscation in Australia, Bermuda, Cuba, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Jamaica and other countries. It has also happened here, and the history of firearms registration in New York City is particularly instructive.
In 1967, New York City passed an ordinance requiring a citizen to obtain a permit to own a rifle or shotgun, which would then be registered. Concerns over the potential use of those registration lists to confiscate guns in the future were dismissed as paranoia. In 1991, gun owners' legitimate fears were realized, when the city passed a ban on the private possession of some semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, despite the police commissioner's testimony that no registered firearms of the types banned had been used in violent crimes in the city. New Yorkers who had been licensed earlier to possess semi-automatic rifles and shotguns were told that any licensed firearms that were covered by the ban had to be surrendered,
rendered inoperable or taken out of the city. They were warned that they might be subject to "spot checks."
American gun owners know their fears about licensing and registration are hardly unfounded, because they are familiar with the sorry story of gun control in Great Britain. This story is concisely told in the monograph, "Lost Battles, Lost Rights," written by David B. Kopel, adjunct professor of law at New York University Law School.
As Kopel recounts, after passage of the Firearms Act of 1920, Britons suddenly could possess pistols and rifles only if they proved they had "good reason" for receiving a police permit. Then, in 1936, the British police began adding a permit requirement requiring that the guns be stored securely.
As the public grew accustomed to the idea of guns being licensed, it became possible to begin to enforce the licensing requirements with greater and greater stringency. By enforcing the Firearms Act with moderation, at first, and then with gradually increasing severity, the British government acclimated British gun owners to higher and higher levels of control.
Today, in Great Britain, handguns are totally banned. Semi-automatic center-fire rifles, which had been legally owned for nearly a century, are completely banned. Pump-action rifles are banned as well, since it was argued that these guns could be substituted for semi-automatics. Shotguns that can hold more than two shells at once now require a "firearms license" and are thus registered, and shotguns that can hold only two rounds require a "shotgun certificate." [...]
American parallels are obvious. Enactment of the Brady Act, for example, establishes the principle of a national gun licensing system. Once a lenient national handgun licensing system is established, the licensing system can gradually be tightened, and police, as they have done in Great Britain, can begin inventing their own conditions to put on licenses. Such practices already occur in American jurisdictions such as New York, where licensing authorities sometimes add their own, extralegal, restrictions to handgun licenses.
Those who from time to time wonder about what American gun owners think and why they think it, should realize that those who believe in their Second Amendment birthright will fight mightily to prevent this nation from becoming, like Great Britain, a place where the rights of gun owner rights are slowly strangled to death because too many people trusted politicians who did not trust them."
Will the criminals part with guns short of enforcing Mao's approach?

* "Gun-ownership is a way of life".........same arguement!
I would say that, it is the right to have a gun, if the person wishes so.

* Morals be damned!
Depends on morals. The same "morals", that now clamour for a gun-ban, cheered the recent "humanitarian bombing", the Soros Fund being one of them.
The loudest in the "human rights" field are the most active in their revokation.
(And the Law is not based on morals and is not morals.)

Dellenn,

You can eat me as you want but I warned you: I' M HARD MEAT!

"We will restrict karate next, "
I like in Jackie-Chan movies. Don't you?
I should watch quality movies... So why the hell everytime I switch on my tv set it's shoting on and on?

"Watch good movies, like The Heat. E-e-e-eh, sorry, there are big guns in it too"
HaHAAA! you see!


...

Kim,
sure, that fox is an exclusive club. The guns are banned, and the club exists;o) As any exclusive-of-majority club. The US Fish and Wildlife Service misappropriated at least $45 million in excise tax funds set aside for game conservation, turning the special accounts into cash cows for pet projects of Clinton. The proposal was to purchase a forgotten atoll off Hawaii for $30 mln., because it had 10 ducks. $3 mln. a duck. Can I don a costume party duck outfit and qualify as one?;o)
It's the people, who should control the govts., not the opposite.

Mssr. LeDingue,
* You can eat me as you want but I warned you: I' M HARD MEAT!
No problem, - sufficient pounding, pressure cookers and time do marvels. Even at high altitudes;o)

* I like in Jackie-Chan movies. Don't you?
Yep. (Not all of them, though.) Much better, then all pseudo-martial arts waste of film.

* So why the hell everytime I switch on my tv set it's shoting on and on?
Heck, don't switch it on! I think, You might be able to find some decent gun-free Brazilian Izaura ...

* HaHAAA! you see!
But I recommended You the Baywatch, Flipper, Izaura. Sounds gun-free. Eh?

bagel...

LMAO...

useless Fake FARIS HOMOUD...

LMAO...

soreknees... when ur IQ reaches 62 - SELL!

lmao...

FAKE AMERICAN GROSS PIG PATHETIC EXCUSE FOR A
HUMAN FARIS HOMOUD:

you'd better find your way to a hospital ASAP, you
[expletive] tonto idiota grande...what's left of
your brain cells are oozing out of your ears.

such is the fate of all kerosene huffers:
a nice padded cell awaits you.
but hey, it's nicer than the shed you live in now,
pince cabron.
hock-PTUI!
-_-
====
{+3sk}

Konichiwa, K-san!
1626

...did you see 'crouching tiger, hidden dragon?'
===
ps> check the mail...
===
{3sk}

just as i thought... kiddie movies! lol...

SELL!

LMAO...

FAKE AMERICAN FARIS HOMOUD:

tonto idiota grande:
'kiddie movie?'
i guess youre not allowed out of your shed too
often, FAKE. it would help if you showered more
often than monthly.
actually that movie was nominated for several
academy awards, and won one of them...
==
[expletive] [expletive] ignorant FAKE FARIS
HOMOUD...
====

{+3sk}

Ohaya, K-san!
0857

fractals links in the mail pour toi...
===

{+3sk}

LOL.. OK Lenny !

It was nominated for best picture which it lost, but won more than 1 oscar.

You Moron.

Where is Bagel these past few days? things must be getting hairy (no punn intended) down there. lol. Either some roughed up hizbollah has got her as part of his harem or the local Rabbi is still searching for the 'promise land' ... LMAO...

By L'menexe ( - 172.159.207.49) on Friday, May 4, 2001 - 04:52 pm:

L'menexe
I agree on most of what you were saying.
____________________________________________________

Regarding to what he posted above, THORNHILL has never understood a single word in polish.
If yes, he wouldn't post totaly irrelevant and unreadable stuff.
Why is he copy/pasting polish material without probably having ever read it? That's a question one shouldn't try to answer.
THORNHILL has the same internet related pathology as the one of Jake Bernstein or Antonio.
Why do they end up on this board? That's what I'd like to know.
____________________________________________________

Dellen

Gun control is a bit like requiring a driving license, an ID, basic education... It's the fundamental of every structured modern society.
You can deregulate, it will not make the whole population assassin. But you should think about what kind of society you want.
Two centuries ago everybody and their dog wore a sword...
It doesn't mean the streets were that less safe than today, but changing the sword for a gun had some repercutions that you could imagine.

Tabaco too doesn't kill everytime. Still e need more regulation on it.

But first of, and I think it's understood, one should think about how to build a society where you don't wish own a gun.

Latino soap opera? Bay Watch?
I confess I enjoy watching (like everybody) a shwazenegger or any good action movies with a lot of gun and explosions...
Still I think there is too much blood on the screen and it's bad for the kids.
As well I think there is too much sex also tought I like it myself.
There are too much money show off also.

* So why the hell everytime I switch on my tv set it's shoting on and on?
Heck, don't switch it on! *

Many times that's what I do (not switching tv on)
After that I feel more intelligent.

=...=