Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1141  
Old 16.01.2013, 23:56
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 2,899
Groaned at 96 Times in 64 Posts
Thanked 4,524 Times in 1,799 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
I believe the shooter in Massachusetts had a perfectly clean record, and perhaps even he (despite his autism) could have obtained a gun permit.
Oops. I mean Connecticut, not Massachusetts. But you know those New England States. They're all the same.

Kidding of course.
Reply With Quote
  #1142  
Old 17.01.2013, 09:51
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,981
Groaned at 68 Times in 51 Posts
Thanked 5,049 Times in 1,795 Posts
crazygringo has a reputation beyond reputecrazygringo has a reputation beyond reputecrazygringo has a reputation beyond reputecrazygringo has a reputation beyond reputecrazygringo has a reputation beyond reputecrazygringo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
One of the aspects of gun control in the US that hasn't really been discussed is social demographics and a large population. In countries such as China and Russia, you have huge numbers people that are as strictly controlled as any other country (with some possible exceptions in the Middle East).

If you look how both China and the original Soviet Union were created after their revolutions last century, there were long periods of censorship, extermination of political opponents and extremism, the average citizen had few rights. In the US it panned out differently, armed citizens ousted the imperialists and a sort of co-operative fed into the mix that created the basis of independence that we now know. Unless you were a slave or a native American, you had a lot more rights than your peer had after any other country's creation. The picture of the firearm bearing citizen was engrained into history and folklore and nowadays into NRA propaganda.

But if you look at how the USA has developed since its inception 200 plus years ago, inbred violence and fear of oppressors has littered the rise of the world's most powerful nation. The Civil War may have settled the slavery issue, but it took another 100 years or so before its effects reached those it promised to liberate. And now the country could almost be an anarchy, because with the exception of the IRS, very few citizens would actually know who is in power by the way they live, because central government doesn't rule daily lives, businesses do. And on a scarier level, gangs control territories, drug use has infiltrated middle America and in this culture of possessions and selfishness, firearms are the tools that Americans have traditionally turned to to settle their issues.

The US Government doesn't control it's citizens, it can't. But maybe it should, but in a democratic and progressive way. Because now there's a nation of haves and have nots, the divide is increasing and the demographics show that the rift is increasing. You'll note how well off America largely criticized medical care for everyone, how every cent of increased taxes is fought like a personal limb is being removed. America cannot care for itself as a single entity, because it is pulling itself apart through selfish self interest and greed. And if the people can't elect each other to sort out the mess that they can't even see that they are in, then the underlying cancer will hit hard.

It starts with a more caring society as I've mentioned before. It starts with your block, your neighborhood, county, state and then the nation as a whole. Or you could buy some more magazines for your Bushmaster assault rifle and barricade yourself inside your mobile home and shoot the next trespasser who might be coming to rob you of your hard earned paycheck.

Today President Obama drew up plans to tighten gun control, but there are still way too many loopholes and there is no way to expect that the millions of weapons already in circulation will ever decrease to an acceptable or controllable level. How do you control hundreds of million of people that are armed just as well as the national authorities? You can't, and the NRA knows it.

Only changing attitudes and perspectives will disarm the madness.
we Americans have 3 principal problems:

1. the federalists won, in that through the course of the 19th and into the 20th centuries we became a strong, centralized federal government instead of a republic. a strong, centralized government, of course, causing the "democracy" to be even less representative and even more indirect. a strong, centralized government, by the way, also being easier to co-opt and manipulate for personal gain.

2. the founders presumed the sanctity of the judicial branch so long as appointment of federal judges was done for life. and their biggest mistake was permitting the President to make those appointments. what has therefore happened in practice is that the judicial branch has been complicit in the creation of a strong, centralized government that is now a self-feeding organism, because the judiciary is part of the power structure just like the rest of the federal government.

3. the founders did not solve the slavery issue at the time of the country's independence, which established a practice of pragmatism and hypocrisy that is antithetical to true liberty and democracy.

the irony to me is that all of the gun rights supporters in this thread appear to be UK natives, since each of the 3 problems above derive directly from our founders' British heritage and predispositions. we are still a "young" nation so anything is possible, but until we find a way to address the underlying root cause issues we will forever be fighting our way back up a slippery slope.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank crazygringo for this useful post:
  #1143  
Old 17.01.2013, 10:36
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St Gallen Kanton
Posts: 933
Groaned at 225 Times in 158 Posts
Thanked 1,951 Times in 890 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Given your line of 'reasoning' the US should disarm everybody including the armed forces and its police force. Yes I agree as humans we are all subject to possible mental illness but we make a trade off don't we? Are you suggesting that we trust the mental health of our protectors over society in general, given that these professions can also be very stressful?

Thats not what she said at all. Twisting arguments to suit your counter arguments again.

Why do you say it would mean disarming the armed forces or police force? Consider the way in which armed forces handle their weapons. They are trained constantly, tought to respect the power of their weapons, taught and drilled in its safe handling. As well as that, they are subject to psychological monitoring and evaluations, to ensure they dont pose a risk to anyone they shouldnt. The same can be said of police officers. These people dont need to be disarmed, and we're not suggesting they are. On occasion, they may too suffer a mental break, but the chances are negligible compared to the average joe.

And if you dont trust the mental health of your protectors, dont elect them to protect you.

Now, back to the advert...Yes the presidents kids, as far as the nation is concerned, are more important. They are seen as a much larger trophy by any would-be terrorists/nutjobs, and therefore are under greater risk. To offer them the same level of security given to average schoolkids, they need the greater security. Keep in mind, this security would also be looking after the rest of the school, so every child at the school would benefit to some degree. It's not a case of 'Mr terrorist, instead of those kids, take these kids, they aren't the presidents kids', is it?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank J2488 for this useful post:
  #1144  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:02
krlock3's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 2,626
Groaned at 40 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 1,611 Times in 831 Posts
krlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Well, in the case of a credible threat at the presidents kid's school, I expect that the presidents kids would benefit rather more than the other kids from their protection.

But if you extend the argument that the NRA mentalists are making, then why shouldnt every American adult also get armed protection if the president gets it?

Oh, wait! They do, by arming themselves with machine guns.

If I ever have a kid, and he grows up thinking that guards armed with guns is a normal and necessary thing at his school... words cannot express how disappointing I find this scenario.
__________________
krlock3.
Reply With Quote
  #1145  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:05
Rodica's children's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Lausanne
Posts: 118
Groaned at 16 Times in 11 Posts
Thanked 78 Times in 60 Posts
Rodica's children has earned some respectRodica's children has earned some respect
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Thats not what she said at all. Twisting arguments to suit your counter arguments again.

Why do you say it would mean disarming the armed forces or police force? Consider the way in which armed forces handle their weapons. They are trained constantly, tought to respect the power of their weapons, taught and drilled in its safe handling. As well as that, they are subject to psychological monitoring and evaluations, to ensure they dont pose a risk to anyone they shouldnt. The same can be said of police officers. These people dont need to be disarmed, and we're not suggesting they are. On occasion, they may too suffer a mental break, but the chances are negligible compared to the average joe.

And if you dont trust the mental health of your protectors, dont elect them to protect you.

Now, back to the advert...Yes the presidents kids, as far as the nation is concerned, are more important. They are seen as a much larger trophy by any would-be terrorists/nutjobs, and therefore are under greater risk. To offer them the same level of security given to average schoolkids, they need the greater security. Keep in mind, this security would also be looking after the rest of the school, so every child at the school would benefit to some degree. It's not a case of 'Mr terrorist, instead of those kids, take these kids, they aren't the presidents kids', is it?
No. Carrie F. was establishing an argument that all human beings are open to some form of mental illness - true, all. In addition to this she lent her argument towards all gun owners being equally susceptible - true. Yes I guess there is some psychological monitoring but in my opinion it doesn't come to much and to imply that soldiers and cops are not made up of ordinary joes is insulting as well as stupid.

"Keep in mind, this security would also be looking after the rest of the school, so every child at the school would benefit to some degree"

Not sure what you had to say on the subject of guarding US schools earlier but now you seem to be placing some favour in it.
Reply With Quote
  #1146  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:06
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,712
Groaned at 536 Times in 346 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

I'm pretty busy this morning so not got time for detailed replies, will tune in later.

One thing that has struck me is how willing people are to accept the presidents children are more important than their own. I do not think even the president himself would support that view.

Perhaps as Nil has pointed out or clarified, it is meant they are under more threat given dads position and thus more important in the context of security. I could never write or contemplate those words entering my head but perhaps gives an insight to the socially engineered mind of some Americans.

Of course I recognise this fact that his children are at greater risk and require adequate security. But it would appear that many other children are at threat from not so obvious perpetrators whom will not be stopped by a restrictions on laws, increased back ground checks or other, may be long term it will have an effect but that doesn't help the next school this year or the one after or the one after. So are we back to the numbers game? Lets restrict laws, do this, do that, but lets not have gun guards, it gives a bad image for our children and what if one goes postal etc etc, and we just accept we will lose a few thousand people a year this way.

Obama has recently laid down his plans. Some encouraging signs, one of which was freeing up funds for additional support in care workers and police at schools which is a step in the right direction I think.
__________________
Small minds are concerned with the extraordinary, great minds with the ordinary, Blaise Pascal
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank JBZ86 for this useful post:
  #1147  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:23
Rodica's children's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Lausanne
Posts: 118
Groaned at 16 Times in 11 Posts
Thanked 78 Times in 60 Posts
Rodica's children has earned some respectRodica's children has earned some respect
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Well, in the case of a credible threat at the presidents kid's school, I expect that the presidents kids would benefit rather more than the other kids from their protection.

But if you extend the argument that the NRA mentalists are making, then why shouldnt every American adult also get armed protection if the president gets it?

Oh, wait! They do, by arming themselves with machine guns.

If I ever have a kid, and he grows up thinking that guards armed with guns is a normal and necessary thing at his school... words cannot express how disappointing I find this scenario.
Well they are already growing up to believe that politicians, cash, jailbirds and other 'valuables' are protected by armed guards.

Its time to see through the rose tinted idea of the school yard and get real, schools are being targeted - give them some protection at least while this madness persists.

Last edited by Rodica's children; 17.01.2013 at 11:24. Reason: test
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Rodica's children for this useful post:
  #1148  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:29
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,712
Groaned at 536 Times in 346 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
If I ever have a kid, and he grows up thinking that guards armed with guns is a normal and necessary thing at his school... words cannot express how disappointing I find this scenario.
And that some people hate other people because of their skin colour or nationality?

Some countries invade others for their resources and power?

People get raped, murdered and tortured everyday?

Kids get kidnapped from their parents?

Yep, it is a bad world, we do try and protect our children from the horrors of reality for a short while, and lie to them about tooth fairies and father christmas, but eventually, they will realise the world is a nasty place at times.

Lets not kid ourselves.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank JBZ86 for this useful post:
  #1149  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:34
Rodica's children's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Lausanne
Posts: 118
Groaned at 16 Times in 11 Posts
Thanked 78 Times in 60 Posts
Rodica's children has earned some respectRodica's children has earned some respect
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
The NRA argument is dreadful on so many levels.

By opposing armed guards in schools, we are accused of not caring for the wellbeing of our children.

It therefore manages to conflate a love of ones's own children with a love of high-powered, lethal weaponry.

It's a brazen, populist approach designed to push the buttons of the gullible.

The most potent argument against the NRA is that they constitute people prepared to deploy such astonishingly cynical tactics. The most potent argument against gun enthusiasts in general is that they do not have the wit or decency to understand that they are being led by the nose in this way.

Simply put, they are too stupid to be trusted with guns.
I'm finding your reference to gun owners as witless, indecent and stupid not only personally insulting but a significant measure of your ignorance.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Rodica's children for this useful post:
  #1150  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:58
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St Gallen Kanton
Posts: 933
Groaned at 225 Times in 158 Posts
Thanked 1,951 Times in 890 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
No. Carrie F. was establishing an argument that all human beings are open to some form of mental illness - true, all. In addition to this she lent her argument towards all gun owners being equally susceptible - true. Yes I guess there is some psychological monitoring but in my opinion it doesn't come to much and to imply that soldiers and cops are not made up of ordinary joes is insulting as well as stupid.

"Keep in mind, this security would also be looking after the rest of the school, so every child at the school would benefit to some degree"

Not sure what you had to say on the subject of guarding US schools earlier but now you seem to be placing some favour in it.

For the love of god, man (or woman), read my post again.

The army/police force is made up of ordinary joes, but they are much more qualified and measured.

'In my opinion it doesnt come to much' Is this based on years of psychiatric analysis of soldiers and police officers? No. People much more qualified then you or me routinely and regularly make sure the mental state of soldiers and officers is maintained at a level whereby they offer minimal risk to civilians. If a soldier starts showing murderous tendencies, they are placed in a environment where they can recover away from guns. Psychiatric analysis is a condition of employment for these people. Not so for the average joe. And that makes these soldiers or officers much more qualified to handle weapons. Example: police are tought and trained to shoot only as a very last resort, when life is in immediate danger. Not to start emptying clips as soon as they feel unsafe.

On the subject of armed guards at schools, i think its abhorrent. Regarding the presidents kids, he has two options: home school or public school. Home schooling would be very expensive, and would be interpreted as elitist and creaming the taxpayer. Not to mention, there is the very real possibility the kids wont develop social skills at the same pace as other kids.

Having them detailed security, in a public school, is a compromise between giving them the same educational experience as other american kids, and protecting them from becoming victims of their valuable target status.

The benefit i was speaking of comes from specially trained bodyguards of the secret service. These guys are trained to spot dangers well before they happen. They are trained and practiced in close protection and would recognise threats to the presidents kids and by extension, the other kids. One could argue the other kids would need some measure of protection too, since they are linked to the presidents immeidate family (tenuous, i know, but the link is there nontheless). Thus the secret service can provide this.

Kids glorify what they grow up around. At such a young age, if we give them the message that guns are nothing more then a tool, to be carried in public, they will not truly appreciate their power. They will grow up considering them as their only means of protection. This is the fallacy here; Guns should not be what makes you feel safe. If you have that mentality, and are ever put in an environment where you dont feel safe (even if it is entirely safe), you instinctively reach for the gun. In this situation, you are stressed, anxious, panicking, adrenaline flowing...and you'd have a gun in your hand.


Thats not the environment i'd want my kids to be raised in.
Reply With Quote
  #1151  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:58
HAT's Avatar
HAT HAT is offline
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Zurich near Zug
Posts: 1,251
Groaned at 90 Times in 56 Posts
Thanked 703 Times in 373 Posts
HAT is considered knowledgeableHAT is considered knowledgeableHAT is considered knowledgeable
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

I must first confess I did not read all 85 posts.
My contribution to this debate is this:

When the rest of the world disarms and the US also disarms, is the same day the US firearms owners disarm and the US police goes around with only a notepad and a pen.

Until that day, it is only prudent to allow law-abiding people to own and carry personal firearms (with all sorts of background checks and even certification training required) while the police sorts out the best way to protect citizens, children in schools, etc.

I agree with proposal to arm incognito "marshalls" in schools for the mid-term solution.


An odd firearm abuse by mad person, is not enough firepower (pardon the pun) to ban guns.
__________________
祸从口出 病从口入 大家自制 小心小人.
Be kind, you are not always right, are you?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank HAT for this useful post:
  #1152  
Old 17.01.2013, 11:58
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Verbier
Posts: 172
Groaned at 6 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 240 Times in 90 Posts
One Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
I don't know if it's still the case but there was a time that in the Scandinavian countries this was very much the case. my mother lived in Norway for three years and said she saw the King riding his bicycle on several occasions, just mixed up in the other traffic.
The Swedish King used to drink in my bar in Verbier, but a bodyguard or two was always at a nearby table. Olof Palme's murder changed the way politicians in Scandinavia went about in public forever.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank One Drop for this useful post:
  #1153  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:00
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,712
Groaned at 536 Times in 346 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
For the love of god, man (or woman), read my post again.

The army/police force is made up of ordinary joes, but they are much more qualified and measured.

Sorry, I got to this bit and fell off my chair laughing. I do want to keep this sensible, so will read the rest now and refrain from anymore jibes.
Reply With Quote
  #1154  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:16
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 9,859
Groaned at 149 Times in 131 Posts
Thanked 13,748 Times in 5,583 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

The NRA are claiming that gun control will make the children of America less safe. Obama would only be a hypocrite if he agreed with that stance. However, he feels that gun control will make the children of America safer. So he isn't a hypocrite.

HTH, BIDI.
Reply With Quote
  #1155  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:17
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Verbier
Posts: 172
Groaned at 6 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 240 Times in 90 Posts
One Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

The NRA is not interested in debate, they are interested in fear-mongering and the demonization of the president, with the selling of more guns and ammunition the ultimate goal. They are simply an extremely organized and wealthy lobby for the arms industry, and they are heavily involved in helping politicians who support their platform to become elected at various levels of government.

They care not a whit for the lives of a single American who cannot help them further their goals, which again, are simply to sell more guns and ammunition. They don't care who else lives, dies, or what life in the US is like for their members or anyone else.

Even engaging this silly and irrelevant argument is a step in the wrong direction, as they have managed to frame the debate in the US for far too long. Patriotism, rewriting constitutional history and intent, character assassination, creating a points system for politicians based on how much of their twisted platform they support, etc, are all part and parcel of their very transparent game. Let the debate continue, but leave these self-serving monsters out of it. IMO.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank One Drop for this useful post:
  #1156  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:30
M_McPoyle's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ZG
Posts: 343
Groaned at 4 Times in 3 Posts
Thanked 1,138 Times in 283 Posts
M_McPoyle has a reputation beyond reputeM_McPoyle has a reputation beyond reputeM_McPoyle has a reputation beyond reputeM_McPoyle has a reputation beyond reputeM_McPoyle has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
I'm pretty busy this morning so not got time for detailed replies, will tune in later.

One thing that has struck me is how willing people are to accept the presidents children are more important than their own. I do not think even the president himself would support that view.

Perhaps as Nil has pointed out or clarified, it is meant they are under more threat given dads position and thus more important in the context of security. I could never write or contemplate those words entering my head but perhaps gives an insight to the socially engineered mind of some Americans.
I don't get that message from reading these posts at all. On an individual level, I doubt anybody here thinks somebody else's children are more important than their own. However, like you have acknowledged, the President's kids face a bigger risk than many - that is certainly one factor that makes their security detail necessary. Just as critical, however, is the need to protect the presidency itself. If you believe that having a clear headed president who is able to do his job is a good thing, then keeping his family safe is important. I imagine if a loved one of yours was kidnapped or worse it would impede your ability to do your job. His ability to do his job is certainly for the common good. In addition, if the children of the president were not highly protected (armed guard, intellegence, etc.) they would likely be an irresistible target and collateral for terrorists etc. to make demands that would be against the interests of the USA. Once again this is in detriment to the entire country. But this all presupposes that the president's job is important and necessary...

Last edited by M_McPoyle; 17.01.2013 at 12:31. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank M_McPoyle for this useful post:
  #1157  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:39
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St Gallen Kanton
Posts: 933
Groaned at 225 Times in 158 Posts
Thanked 1,951 Times in 890 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Sorry, I got to this bit and fell off my chair laughing. I do want to keep this sensible, so will read the rest now and refrain from anymore jibes.

Constructive...Thanks. You're a credit to EF. They should make a JBZ86 trophy and give it to the idiot who fell off his chair.
Reply With Quote
  #1158  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:45
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Verbier
Posts: 172
Groaned at 6 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 240 Times in 90 Posts
One Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond reputeOne Drop has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Constructive...Thanks. You're a credit to EF. They should make a JBZ86 trophy and give it to the idiot who fell off his chair.
To be honest I would have probably won it already. It was an unintentionally humorous remark to my admittedly cynical mind.
Reply With Quote
  #1159  
Old 17.01.2013, 12:59
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Zurich
Posts: 49
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanked 34 Times in 20 Posts
Brendan is considered knowledgeableBrendan is considered knowledgeableBrendan is considered knowledgeable
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
I don't know if it's still the case but there was a time that in the Scandinavian countries this was very much the case. my mother lived in Norway for three years and said she saw the King riding his bicycle on several occasions, just mixed up in the other traffic.

Maybe 40 years ago, the Norwegian Royals are very well protected these days. They are not as high profile as other heads of state but they are very well protected.
Reply With Quote
  #1160  
Old 17.01.2013, 13:13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Zurich
Posts: 49
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanked 34 Times in 20 Posts
Brendan is considered knowledgeableBrendan is considered knowledgeableBrendan is considered knowledgeable
Re: New NRA Ad: Are the Presidents kids mor important than yours?

Quote:
View Post
Yes, I was having dinner at a sushi restaurant in Oslo, and the woman I was with mentioned that the blond on the other side of the sushi-bar was the crown-princess. No armed guards anywhere.

Tom

Bolloks, you may not have seen them but they were there.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
brown, darren wilson, ferguson, gun control, guns, kids, police, shooting range, usa




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit Sean Connery Other/general 126 07.12.2012 15:41
Gun import from the US DantesDame Other/general 4 04.12.2012 18:02
US Gun Control Laws Caviarchips International affairs/politics 179 20.08.2012 23:48
The US taking control of the Interwebz? Nelly_Da_Hefferlump International affairs/politics 4 14.10.2010 01:30
Washington Post story about gun control in Switzerland Bartholemew Swiss politics/news 39 23.05.2007 14:24


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 16:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0