$1500 Cash Reward

Recently, Blueskies posted:

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 May 2007 22:27:30 GMT, kontiki wrote:

Sir... most crime victims were just going about their normal routine
and were chosen by the perpetrator because they looked like a good
"victim" who would not have a means of defense. I am not talking
about gang or drug related violence here.

So it would have been a good idea if the folks at Colombine would
have carried a gun themselves? Is that what you want to say?



Yes, and the folks on 9/11 would have had a better chance if they
also we allowed to carry...

I can only imagine a different outcome that might have suited the
intentions of terrorists even better, as it would have still killed a
large number of people *and* taken a serious bite out of air travel from
that point on.

Neil

posting a sign in front of your
home that states clearly: "This Home Contains NO Firearms."

That would just be the opposite of my example.

The point is that if a home (or person) is known to be unarmed,
criminals (that's what we're protecting against, remember) know that
it's an easy target.

In a society where all the good people are known to be unarmed,
criminals have a field day.

In a society where all the bad people agree to be unarmed... well, I'd
like to see that society.

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2007 06:23:47 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote:

Indeed, go figure. Go figure as well that Switzerland had even fewer deaths
than the UK and every home is REQURED to have guns.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

hmm, Switzerland is a neighboring country. I didn't knew that. Do you have
some sources for this claim? Please from .ch domains.
You might mean that men on reserve from the swiss military are required to
have their equipment (and gun/riffle/??) at home.

Every able bodied male in Switzerland gets basic military training
and is sent home with their personal weapon and a supply of ammunition.

The ammunition is subject to inspection, but ammunition for practice
is readily available and subsidized by the government.

Government subsidized ammunition obtained at a range is supposed to
be used at the range, but this is hardly ever enforced.

Ammunition is also readily available at retail.

At the expiration of the required term of service (age 30 or 34 depending
on rank), the individual can choose to keep their weapon.

There are numerous ranges in Switzerland and target shooting is a
common sport.

All this can be easily found with a Google search.

The fact that virtually every Swiss household has at least one firearm
per adult male yet has a extremely low crime rate is something the
anti-firearms people don't like to talk about.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

... and still we have such a low crime-rate

What kind of environment do you live in? (urban, rural, neighborhood,
do you know your neighbors...)
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2007 06:23:47 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote:

Indeed, go figure. Go figure as well that Switzerland had even fewer
deaths than the UK and every home is REQURED to have guns.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

hmm, Switzerland is a neighboring country. I didn't knew that. Do you
have some sources for this claim? Please from .ch domains.
You might mean that men on reserve from the swiss military are
required to have their equipment (and gun/riffle/??) at home.

It goes deeper than that. See:

"Gun politics in Switzerland"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...in_Switzerland
(Links to .ch web sites in the above article.)

"Switzerland and the gun"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1566715.stm

Regarding the U.S.: Since the United States was created by an act of
rebellion it seems reasonable to conclude that act lead to a natural
cultural predilection toward personal gun ownership. The U.S. also
originated on a colonial frontier where the gun was a necessary tool of
survival.

Matt Whiting wrote:
The US is on this list, but the UK is now 3rd in the world. So, tell
me again how great things are in the UK...

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...e-total-crimes

Matt, this graph provides a better view since it is normalized per capita:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...mes-per-capita

The U.K. has more crimes per capita than the U.S.!
And New Zealand has the second highest rate in the world!

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Sun, 27 May 2007 22:03:48 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

It must suck to be in your country and be defenseless against criminals.

I don't know about NZ, but our country has waaaay less criminals,
shootings, lower overall crime-rate than - let's say - New York City or Los
Angeles (might be the same number of people, about 8 or 9 million).

We also don't have shootings at schools or universities, we don't need
security checks at school entrances.

So what is the difference?

Matt

#m
I thought you lived in Germany? What about this?

Friday, 26 April, 2002, 21:32 GMT 22:32 UK
18 dead in German school shooting
Distraught people outside the school in Erfurt
The Gutenberg school is well-known in Erfurt
Eighteen people died when an expelled former pupil went on a shooting
spree at his school in the eastern German city of Erfurt.

Masked and dressed in black, the gunman walked through classrooms
killing 14 teachers, two schoolgirls and one of the first policemen on
the scene before taking his own life.

or this?

March 2000
Branneburg, Germany One teacher killed by a 15-year-old student, who
then shot himself. The shooter has been in a coma ever since.

or this:

Feb. 19, 2002
Freising, Germany Two killed in Eching by a man at the factory from
which he had been fired; he then traveled to Freising and killed the
headmaster of the technical school from which he had been expelled. He
also wounded another teacher before killing himself.

Martin Hotze wrote:


thanks for the links. hmm, I knew about the men off the military having
their waepons at home, but I didn't knew that it was that extreme there.

Extreme? Only extrem by your frame of reference.

Next time meeting people from Switzerland I have to ask them how this is
handled in every day life and if they already have a chance to turn down
military service (IIRC they had a vote on that).


Regarding the U.S.: Since the United States was created by an act of
rebellion it seems reasonable to conclude that act lead to a natural
cultural predilection toward personal gun ownership. The U.S. also
originated on a colonial frontier where the gun was a necessary tool of
survival.


yes, but this has been some hundred years now. ;-)


Actually it has been more than 200 years since the United states gained
its independence from England. The very first clash between British
troops and colonial Americans was precipitated by the intention of
the british troops to capture the amory at Lexington and Concord.
The Americans knew that if the British were successful in this that
their chances to defend their right to the freedoms they desired would
not have a chance to succed if they were disarmed.

Martin Hotze wrote:

No, I mean those very fine men and women at the immigration desk of big
airports asking stupid questions to plainloads full of *tourists* who only
want to spend *money* (holidays, you know) in this country.

Well now here we might find some common ground. I feel it is totally
inane to strip search littel old ladies at airports while leaving the
borders essentially open.

And all this
crap already started before bording in Europe. And this was well pre 9-11.
BTDT, but like many others I met (by chance) we now spend our $$ elsewhere.
So for several years now there was no "BTDT", but I heard it got worse. But
this is OK with me. Your country, your rules. Really! (But it would be
great if you would make this more clear overseas.)

Well, in case you haven't noticed... a good percentage of the world
supposedly *hates* the United States. (the reasons are varied and I
won't delve into them now).

Just let us (me) know if anything changes (back to normal) so we (I) might
consider your really beautiful country again for our (my) vacation
destination and maybe for a really nice x-country. I really enjoyed
travelling there. It now would even be a bargain (about 40% cheaper),
compared to (eg) 2002, thanks to the current exchange rate.


It will probably change when most of the rest of the wolrs'd rhetoric
changes from blaming Ameica for every possible ailment of mankind to
appreciating America's efforts in providing assistance from everything
from stopping German dictators to feeding vivtims of Tsunamis.

Well now here we might find some common ground. I feel it is totally
inane to strip search littel old ladies at airports while leaving the
borders essentially open.

If little old ladies get a free pass, that's how the next weapon would
be smuggled aboard. With or without the little old lady's knowledge.
It's like putting a sign on your house saying "no weapons here".

It is impossible to provide complete security in a free and open
society. And so long as data, discourse, and opinions are allowed to
freely pass through the borders, seeds will be planted here for citizens
to become terrorists too. It's a question of what you want to give up.

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.