Interesting - from BBC web site
This is a discussion on Interesting - from BBC web site within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Sig229
Half of my Family is from Scotland.
Now that Scotland is starting to gain its independence from century's of English bloody ...
July 7th, 2007 08:11 AM
Have you discussed private gun ownership with any Scots lately? I've found them to be less polite than the English in letting you know how crazy they think our gun laws are. Dunblane is fresh in their minds.
Originally Posted by Sig229
July 7th, 2007 08:20 AM
Welcome, it's good to see more good folks making themselves safer. Common sense will go a long way toward bolstering our ranks.
Originally Posted by brokenbow
There have been several anti's change their mind after a close call with a bad guy. Not that you were an anti. (I reread this post after posting and didn't like the way it sounded, it was never my intent to say you were apposed to guns, sorry) enjoy your newfound security.
July 7th, 2007 08:26 AM
July 7th, 2007 08:40 AM
I thought so. I'm just not sure that was the Beeb's intention or how it will be seen by British readers. Looked good to me.
Originally Posted by Tangle
July 7th, 2007 08:55 AM
Well the world is becoming smaller. I fear that crazy gun bans in places like Britain do our own gun rights no good. I'm concerned about any international movement or push to ban gun ownership. I'd rather see people like the Brits, the Canadians and the Ozzies have the same rights to keep and bear arms that we do. Would be better for all of us.
Originally Posted by CopperKnight
July 7th, 2007 09:54 AM
The article didn't express an editorial bias for or against citizens' or students' right to self-defense, and it wasn't well constructed either. I'm no English teacher, but the article's title suggested that it was focused on the subject of carrying of firearms by students on campus. But then its first half presented pro-gun opinions and examples from both general citizens and a student. Then it only covered the no-guns opinion of a single school security chief as it specifically related to on-campus student carry. The article should have limited itself to a discussion of campus carry or should have broadened to a discussion of firearm carry in the broad public arena and presented both sides from that sphere.
July 7th, 2007 11:08 AM
Thank you. Never been an "anti". I've grown up around guns and have hunted all of my life. I hunt year round with guns and archery (lots of pigs year around), I just never had any use for a pistol 'cause I could buy a good rifle for the same price. My ears are still "poping" from when I pulled my head out of my butt, and realized that this, (VT) crap can happen to me. I may just have ONE chance in a lifetime to save my life. I need to be prepared if I am given that ONE chance.
Originally Posted by dls56
July 7th, 2007 11:49 AM
You speak the truth. There are plenty of international movements afoot through the UN which are trying to be foisted upon us.
Originally Posted by wmhawth
As would I. I hope those who read the article take it to heart and think it through logically, but we know many people live off of emotion and not logic. Logic won't win out if a person doesn't want it to.
Originally Posted by wmhawth
The only thing that stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns. SgtD
July 9th, 2007 08:37 AM
Some of the British press have seen the light on gun bans, they just haven't been able to convince the guvt or the masses (yet). They've had a lot of home grown terror over there in years past, but I wonder if recent events will open some eyes. Can't shoot a suicide bomber, but you sure can plug a failed bomber as he runs away!
"Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18
Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
Paramedics With Guns Scare People!
July 9th, 2007 09:05 AM
Or a nut case slashing people with a sword or machete (like what happened in Japan not long ago) or a terrorist who got their hands on a gun.
Originally Posted by paramedic70002
I hope one day the crazy British will see the light. But as long as most of therm support the Royal family who really do nothing for the county but wast hundreds of millions of pounds in tax payers money each year, I dont know how logical thinking they can possible be!
Primary Carry Gun: Sig Sauer 229~R (.40cal w/ Golden Saber JHP's)
July 9th, 2007 10:37 AM
A close friend just got back from a month-long family vacation in Europe. He mentioned that the BBC makes our NPR/PBS sound like a bunch of Young Republicans! So please take WHATEVER the BBC reports with a proverbial grain of salt. The once Proud British Empire is now in perfect Lock (Goose) Step with the New World Order.
There are only TWO kinds of people in this world; those who describe the world as filled with two kinds of people...and those who don't.
July 9th, 2007 10:42 AM
Doesn't make sense.
Originally Posted by ghost tracker
A pivotal point came with Bush’s 11 September 1990 "Toward a New World Order" speech (full text)to a joint session of Congress. This time it was Bush, not Gorbachev, whose idealism was compared to Woodrow Wilson, and to FDR at the creation of the UN. Key points picked up in the press were:
- Commitment to U.S. strength, such that it can lead the world toward rule of law, rather than use of force. The Gulf crisis was seen as a reminder that the U.S. must continue to lead, and that military strength does matter, but that the resulting new world order should make military force less important in the future.
- Soviet-American partnership in cooperation toward making the world safe for democracy, making possible the goals of the UN for the first time since its inception. Some countered that this was unlikely, and that ideological tensions would remain, such that the two superpowers could be partners of convenience for specific and limited goals only. The inability of the USSR to project force abroad was another factor in skepticism toward such a partnership.
- Another caveat raised was that the new world order was based not on U.S.-Soviet cooperation, but really on Bush-Gorbachev cooperation, and that the personal diplomacy made the entire concept exceedingly fragile.
- Future cleavages were to be economic, not ideological, with the First and Second world cooperating to contain regional instability in the Third World. Russia could become an ally against economic assaults from Asia, Islamic terrorism, and drugs from Latin America.
- Soviet integration into world economic institutions, such as the G7, and establishment of ties with the European Community.
- Restoration of German sovereignty and Cambodia’s acceptance of the UN Security Council’s peace plan on the day previous to the speech were seen as signs of what to expect in the new world order
- The reemergence of Germany and Japan as members of the great powers, and concomitant reform of the UN Security Council was seen as necessary for great power cooperation and reinvigorated UN leadership
- Europe was seen as taking the lead on building their own world order, while the U.S. was relegated to the sidelines. The rationale for U.S. presence on the continent was vanishing, and the Gulf crisis was seen as incapable of rallying Europe. Instead Europe was discussing the European Community, the CSCE, and relations with the USSR. Gorbachev even proposed an all-European security council to replace the CSCE, in effect superseding the increasingly irrelevant NATO.
- A very few postulated a bi-polar new order of U.S. power and UN moral authority, the first as global policeman, the second as global judge and jury. The order would be collectivist, in which decisions and responsibility would be shared.
July 9th, 2007 10:55 AM
I guess he missed the fact that we have folks serving in Iraq, Afganistan, and other places at age 18!
"Our officers have a level of life experience which students can't possibly have at the age of 21 or 22."
Please take a moment to help a Veteran and one of our own: gofundme.com/5d9dfa2s
By chromedome82 in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
Last Post: September 5th, 2009, 11:37 AM
By Tangle in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: April 30th, 2009, 05:04 PM
By QKShooter in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: May 12th, 2006, 07:42 PM
By Free American in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
Last Post: August 10th, 2005, 03:26 AM