PROOF there are no terrorists

[b***@anneli.com]

Well, it took 24 hours for the Government to figure out how they
couldn't white wash Va. Tech shooting with propaganda. This is why
the media has held back on giving an ID on the shooter; because they
awaited the B.S. from the Government.
Nonetheless, if an Asian student on a visa can get a gun, you know
fully well that, for Allah, some towel headed lunatic can too.
So, I ask, why haven't a diaper headed jerk done in New York subway
if there are terrorists. Answer, there are no terrorist. All a B.S.
lie to keep you in line while Bush/Chenny get oil.

"Go to bed or the closet monster will eat you up"
(says mommy/daddy as they whump each other).






.--. .----------------
// / \ __ / ---------
///////\( -, -------
//// /// '~ ( -----
// / // : ) ----- Raven
/ / / /) / ---- BlackBane
/ //..\\ A Real Witch
~~~~~~UU~~~~UU~~~~~~~~~
'//||\\


http://www.myspace.com/raven_blackbane

PNN (Psychic Network News): Bringing Tomorrows News Yesterday.
***@anneli.com
creator of alt.witchcraft
creator of alt.traditional.witchcraft
original creator of alt.religion.wicca
don't like my postings, then go to:

alt.religion.wicca.moderated

[ren]

On Apr 17, 9:11 pm, ***@anneli.com wrote:

> Nonetheless, if an Asian student on a visa can get a gun, you know

http://www.bloggernews.net/16064

[Barnabas Collins]

Spoiler space
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+






On 17 Apr 2007 05:11:11 -0700, ***@anneli.com wrote:

> Well, it took 24 hours for the Government to figure out how they
>couldn't white wash Va. Tech shooting with propaganda. This is why
>the media has held back on giving an ID on the shooter; because they
>awaited the B.S. from the Government.
First of all they had a lot of trouble identifying the guy. He
carried no identificaion, he had a receipt for a gun purchase
in his backpack, and his hands and face were severly disfigured.
How do you identify someone when their face is gone, their
fingerprints are gone, and his teeth were probably destroyed?

That is why it took so long to identify him.

He was also a student at the school, nobody seems to have known
him.

> Nonetheless, if an Asian student on a visa can get a gun, you know
>fully well that, for Allah, some towel headed lunatic can too.
Very true. For the record he is from South Korea and was here
since he was 8 years old.

[ren]

> Very true. For the record he is from South Korea and was here
> since he was 8 years old.

They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.

But they do not mention how he obtained those pistols. I want to know.

I also want to know why the school did not alert everyone that there
had been two previous murders that morning.

I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
murder that now happens all the time.

[Douglas]

ren wrote:
>>Very true. For the record he is from South Korea and was here
>>since he was 8 years old.
>
>
> They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
> plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.
>

Sounds like quite a few people I've known over the years... though
they just write and have not killed anyone.

> But they do not mention how he obtained those pistols. I want to know.
>

Probably went to a store where they sell guns, filled out the
paperwork, waited, went back and picked up his guns. Didn't he
have a receipt in his bag?

> I also want to know why the school did not alert everyone that there
> had been two previous murders that morning.
>
> I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
> murder that now happens all the time.
>

What exactly do you propose they do?

-Douglas

[Vigyazat]

Douglas <***@cox.net> wrote :

>> I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
>> murder that now happens all the time.
>>
>
> What exactly do you propose they do?

Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
Second Amendment actually MEANS...

Or, to put it another way, a touch of gun control might help; and no more
pandering to those who think that "the people" means "Every Tom, Dick and
Harry, No Questions Asked".

--
Vigyazat

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 12:02 am, Vigyazat <***@ubgznvy.pb.hx> wrote:
> Douglas <***@cox.net> wrote :
>
> >> I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
> >> murder that now happens all the time.
>
> > What exactly do you propose they do?
>
> Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
> Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>
> Or, to put it another way, a touch of gun control might help; and no more
> pandering to those who think that "the people" means "Every Tom, Dick and
> Harry, No Questions Asked".
>
> --
> Vigyazat

Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.

Well, the current gun control laws provide a first line of defense
against
"Every Tom, Dick and Harry, No Questions Asked" getting their hands
on firearms. Can't say I know of anything that will solve this
problem,
but disarming law abiding citizens does not seem to be the
answer. It hasn't appeared to work in those cities with strict
gun control laws.

-Douglas

[Baird Stafford]

In article <***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net> wrote:

<snip>

> Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
> situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
> to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.

> Well, the current gun control laws provide a first line of defense
> against "Every Tom, Dick and Harry, No Questions Asked" getting their
> hands on firearms. Can't say I know of anything that will solve this
> problem, but disarming law abiding citizens does not seem to be the
> answer. It hasn't appeared to work in those cities with strict gun
> control laws.

As long as we don't have people who stop us at every state border and
city limit to ask for our papers and search our belongings, fire arms
are easy to get. In point of fact, one of the points that has been made
repeatedly is that Virginia has gun control laws that are among the most
lax in the nation. And Virginia is pretty close to the Big Apple, given
the scale of the nation....

A *national* gun control law, now, which is enforced on all dealers,
would cut down on the problem. It wouldn't eliminate it, since guns can
always be stolen and often are - frequently, assault weapons out of
police vehicles, around here - but it would have made it harder for
someone like Cho to get hold of the weapons he used.

Blessed be,
Baird

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 12:16 pm, Baird Stafford <***@newstaff.com> wrote:
> In article <***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
> > situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
> > to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.
> > Well, the current gun control laws provide a first line of defense
> > against "Every Tom, Dick and Harry, No Questions Asked" getting their
> > hands on firearms. Can't say I know of anything that will solve this
> > problem, but disarming law abiding citizens does not seem to be the
> > answer. It hasn't appeared to work in those cities with strict gun
> > control laws.
>
> As long as we don't have people who stop us at every state border and
> city limit to ask for our papers and search our belongings, fire arms
> are easy to get. In point of fact, one of the points that has been made
> repeatedly is that Virginia has gun control laws that are among the most
> lax in the nation. And Virginia is pretty close to the Big Apple, given
> the scale of the nation....
>
> A *national* gun control law, now, which is enforced on all dealers,
> would cut down on the problem. It wouldn't eliminate it, since guns can
> always be stolen and often are - frequently, assault weapons out of
> police vehicles, around here - but it would have made it harder for
> someone like Cho to get hold of the weapons he used.
>
> Blessed be,
> Baird

How so... if Cho had a clean record and no hospitalizations for
mental illness... what in a gun control law would prevent him
from purchasing a firearm.

-Douglas

[root]

On Apr 18, 11:11 pm, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Apr 18, 12:16 pm, Baird Stafford <***@newstaff.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> > Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > > Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
> > > situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
> > > to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.
> > > Well, the current gun control laws provide a first line of defense
> > > against "Every Tom, Dick and Harry, No Questions Asked" getting their
> > > hands on firearms. Can't say I know of anything that will solve this
> > > problem, but disarming law abiding citizens does not seem to be the
> > > answer. It hasn't appeared to work in those cities with strict gun
> > > control laws.
>
> > As long as we don't have people who stop us at every state border and
> > city limit to ask for our papers and search our belongings, fire arms
> > are easy to get. In point of fact, one of the points that has been made
> > repeatedly is that Virginia has gun control laws that are among the most
> > lax in the nation. And Virginia is pretty close to the Big Apple, given
> > the scale of the nation....
>
> > A *national* gun control law, now, which is enforced on all dealers,
> > would cut down on the problem. It wouldn't eliminate it, since guns can
> > always be stolen and often are - frequently, assault weapons out of
> > police vehicles, around here - but it would have made it harder for
> > someone like Cho to get hold of the weapons he used.
>
> > Blessed be,
> > Baird
>
> How so... if Cho had a clean record and no hospitalizations for
> mental illness... what in a gun control law would prevent him
> from purchasing a firearm.

Same as the firearm laws here in the UK - staged licensing and checks.
Handguns are banned, period.
At 14 yrs You can own an air rfle or air pistol without a firearms
license.
At 17 yrs you can apply for a shotgun license (single or double barrel
- no pump action weapons), which involves a police officer vsiting
your home, checking you have a secure locked cabinet for the weapon,
and a full background check is done, and you need references from
'upstanding members of the community' to sponsor your application.
That police officer is then responsible for allowing you a license.
If all goes well, and you stay out of any kind of trouble, after 4
years you can apply for another shotgun license (each weapon must be
inividually licensed), or you can move up to a single shot rifle,
starting wih a .177Cal, then 2 years after that (again if no trouble),
you can move up to a .22Cal single shot - and so on, I believe
automatic and semi-automatic weapons are only available to specialist
clubs, and cannot leave the premises.
So by the time you (legally) get to have an AK-47, you're 30 years
old, and cannot take it from the firing range.

Of course this does nothing to stop the trade in illegal weapons.

golwg

Matthew

[Nevermore]

In <baird-***@news-server.cfl.rr.com> Baird Stafford
wrote:

> A national gun control law, now, which is enforced on all dealers,
> would cut down on the problem.

We have that now. We have an entire federal agency (the ATF) devoted to
enforcing it to the tune of millions of dollars a year. We have
ratcheted up, "tightened", and re-thought our local, state, and national
gun control laws after every single major tragedy. You aren't seriously
arguing that after the McMassacre, the postal shootings, the school
shootings, Columbine, the mall shootings, the drive-by epidemic, the
Amish school, etc. etc. that nobody paid attention but NOW by Jezum
we're serious ?!?!?!?

> It wouldn't eliminate it, since guns
> can always be stolen and often are - frequently, assault weapons out
> of police vehicles, around here - but it would have made it harder
> for someone like Cho to get hold of the weapons he used.

Cho didn't steal his guns. He followed gun purchasing rules to the
letter. He did this in broad daylight on a campus that had already
been swarming with police for two hours because of an actual shooting -
not a hypothetical threat - he did it in a state that already has laws
against murdering people on its books and furthermore has the second
highest record of executing convicted killers of any state in the Union.

What does it take to prove to you that neither prevention nor deterrence
were effective in this case? There is a point to where you have to rely
on an actual defense - its called the victims returning fire.

Nevermore

[Barnabas Collins]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:31:29 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
wrote:
>What does it take to prove to you that neither prevention nor deterrence
>were effective in this case? There is a point to where you have to rely
>on an actual defense - its called the victims returning fire.
So if everyone is armed we'd have 200 dead instead of
34.

[d***@gmail.com]

On Apr 19, 1:59 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:31:29 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
> wrote:>What does it take to prove to you that neither prevention nor deterrence
> >were effective in this case? There is a point to where you have to rely
> >on an actual defense - its called the victims returning fire.
>
> So if everyone is armed we'd have 200 dead instead of
> 34.

Heh, more ridiculous speculation based on nothing but
your reactionary opinion.

-Douglas

[Barnabas Collins]

On 19 Apr 2007 14:53:42 -0700, ***@gmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 19, 1:59 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:31:29 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
>> wrote:>What does it take to prove to you that neither prevention nor deterrence
>> >were effective in this case? There is a point to where you have to rely
>> >on an actual defense - its called the victims returning fire.
>>
>> So if everyone is armed we'd have 200 dead instead of
>> 34.
>
>Heh, more ridiculous speculation based on nothing but
>your reactionary opinion.
>
>-Douglas


I get a kick out of these people who say if more people were armed
this wouldn't happen. This isn't Hollywood. I'll tell you what
would happen. One guy fires into a crowd. Another guy fires his
gun wildly missing. So while these two guys pumped up on Testosterone
are having a pissing contest to with their guns a couple
hundred people will get shot.

And because crazed with testosterone they'll both miss their intended
targets and alot of people wil get killed.

Time wake up and smell the coffee. This ain't Hollywood
and you may have a gun but you're not going to shoot the
perp dead in one shot.

[Nevermore]

In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:59:22 -0400
> Organization: None completely disorganized
>
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:31:29 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
> wrote:
>>What does it take to prove to you that neither prevention nor
>>deterrence were effective in this case? There is a point to where
>>you have to rely on an actual defense - its called the victims
>>returning fire.

> So if everyone is armed we'd have 200 dead instead of
> 34.

That's so ridiculous I don't even know where to start. How many times
have 200 people been hit and killed in crossfire from a close range
counter-fire situation directed back at a single active shooter? I'm
proposing that responsible citizens and students be allowed to carry
handguns, not push around turret-mounted naval Close-in Weapons Systems
on luggage carts.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:16:13 -0400, Baird Stafford
<***@newstaff.com> wrote:
>As long as we don't have people who stop us at every state border and
>city limit to ask for our papers and search our belongings, fire arms
>are easy to get. In point of fact, one of the points that has been made
>repeatedly is that Virginia has gun control laws that are among the most
>lax in the nation. And Virginia is pretty close to the Big Apple, given
>the scale of the nation....
Yes the state of Virginia has the most lenient gun laws. What is
becoming evident is various entities knew about his background that
he never should have been able to buy a gun.

His grandmother says he is Autistic. His parents called
campus police last year to expres concern about him
committing suicide. There were a number of instances where he wss
involved in stalking incidents, he set fire in his dorm room,
and his writing was very violent and very heavy with swears.
(Now care needs to be taken here.....if you complain about
how violet his writing is Stephen King would have been in
deep trouble long ago.....And a teacher gets 150 term papers,
if you got rid of all the papers with swear words in them
the teacher would have one paper left.)



>
>A *national* gun control law, now, which is enforced on all dealers,
>would cut down on the problem. It wouldn't eliminate it, since guns can
>always be stolen and often are - frequently, assault weapons out of
>police vehicles, around here - but it would have made it harder for
>someone like Cho to get hold of the weapons he used.
If some immigrant from South Korea can buy a gun even with
extensive mental problems than so can someone working with Bin
Laden.

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 09:55:14 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
>situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
>to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.
First and foremost we need the police to go after real criminals,
not those dangerous speeders, illegal parkers, etc.

If they went after real crime as zealously as they go after
speeders the murder rate would be much lower.

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 1:27 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2007 09:55:14 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:>Not quite sure what form of gun control is going to prevent such
> >situations. While living in NYC, I found that gun control did nothing
> >to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or ordinary citizens.
>
> First and foremost we need the police to go after real criminals,
> not those dangerous speeders, illegal parkers, etc.
>
> If they went after real crime as zealously as they go after
> speeders the murder rate would be much lower.

Not much chance of that happening... too much revenue to
be made catching the speeders, illegal parkers, drunk drivers
than catching criminals.

-Douglas

[Barnabas Collins]

>Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
>Second Amendment actually MEANS...

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.

This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
Smith who is acting alone.

[Nevermore]

In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:17:51 -0400
> Organization: None completely disorganized
>
>>Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what
>>the Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>
> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
> infringed.
>
> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
> Smith who is acting alone.
>
Then why does it say "people" and not "police, military, or militia."
The Founders certainly knew the difference.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:17:08 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
wrote:

>In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
>> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
>> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
>> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:17:51 -0400
>> Organization: None completely disorganized
>>
>>>Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what
>>>the Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>>
>> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
>> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
>> infringed.
>>
>> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
>> Smith who is acting alone.
>>
>Then why does it say "people" and not "police, military, or militia."
>The Founders certainly knew the difference.

Because people make up the military and the police.

[Nevermore]

In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:00:55 -0400
> Organization: None completely disorganized
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:17:08 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
> wrote:
>
>>In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins
>>wrote:
>>> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
>>> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
>>> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:17:51 -0400
>>> Organization: None completely disorganized
>>>
>>>>Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what
>>>>the Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>>>
>>> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
>>> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
>>> infringed.
>>>
>>> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
>>> Smith who is acting alone.
>>>
>>Then why does it say "people" and not "police, military, or militia."
>>The Founders certainly knew the difference.
>
> Because people make up the military and the police.
>
So next time I walk up to an ammo dump and it says "Military Access
Only" I can stroll right in because the military are really people and
I'm a people?

That's really what you think the Founders had in mind? They could lead
a world altering revolution and hold vast debates on the nature of
government for months on end but when they wrote their conclusions down
and voted on them had D- writing skills?

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 1:17 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
> >Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>
> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
> infringed.
>
> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
> Smith who is acting alone.

Citizens are what would make up a militia... with civilians who
had firearms... a militia could be pulled together. Wasn't this
originally envisioned as the manner in which the people could
fight against a tyrannical state army/police force?

-Douglas

[Bassos]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 18, 1:17 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
>> >Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>>
>> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
>> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
>> infringed.
>>
>> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
>> Smith who is acting alone.
>
> Citizens are what would make up a militia... with civilians who
> had firearms... a militia could be pulled together. Wasn't this
> originally envisioned as the manner in which the people could
> fight against a tyrannical state army/police force?

Yes.

A well armed populace being the best defense against tyranny.
Worked spiffy..... (ehem)

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 11:12 pm, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote:
> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 1:17 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> >Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what the
> >> >Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>
> >> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
> >> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
> >> infringed.
>
> >> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
> >> Smith who is acting alone.
>
> > Citizens are what would make up a militia... with civilians who
> > had firearms... a militia could be pulled together. Wasn't this
> > originally envisioned as the manner in which the people could
> > fight against a tyrannical state army/police force?
>
> Yes.
>
> A well armed populace being the best defense against tyranny.
> Worked spiffy..... (ehem)

What country are you from anyway?

-Douglas

[Bassos]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 18, 11:12 pm, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote:
>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 18, 1:17 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> >Gods forbid they should stop buggering about and get a grip on what
>> >> >the
>> >> >Second Amendment actually MEANS...
>>
>> >> A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
>> >> State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
>> >> infringed.
>>
>> >> This means a police force and/or military outfit. Not John
>> >> Smith who is acting alone.
>>
>> > Citizens are what would make up a militia... with civilians who
>> > had firearms... a militia could be pulled together. Wasn't this
>> > originally envisioned as the manner in which the people could
>> > fight against a tyrannical state army/police force?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> A well armed populace being the best defense against tyranny.
>> Worked spiffy..... (ehem)
>
> What country are you from anyway?

Such a short memory.

No wonder you think you cannot discuss this stuff with me.
You do not pay attention.
(i already tolld you that aswell)

[ren]

> What exactly do you propose they do?
>
> -Douglas

I don't know exactly, Douglas. The reason that I can't visit you in
Phoenix is that I no longer live there.

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 7:37 am, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > What exactly do you propose they do?
>
> > -Douglas
>
> I don't know exactly, Douglas. The reason that I can't visit you in
> Phoenix is that I no longer live there.

You don't know but you keep crying for more gun control and
keep ignoring any points regarding those cities who have
instituted the gun control laws you cry for and it has not
prevented the use of guns by criminals.

If you were really interested in this subject you would
do some actual research into both sides of the issue
and figure out what are the top resolutions on both
sides of the issue and then make a logical argument
for whichever one you think holds the most promise.
But no, ren will just be the reactionary fool he has
always been.

What does where you live have anything to do with this.
Besides you probably never did live in Phoenix and
probably didn't ever visit my gallery... esp. considering
past posts I dug up where people have pointed out
you often lie about visiting people.

-Douglas

[ren]

> What does where you live have anything to do with this.
> Besides you probably never did live in Phoenix and
> probably didn't ever visit my gallery... esp. considering
> past posts I dug up where people have pointed out
> you often lie about visiting people.
>
> -Douglas

But you don't know who Gabriel David is. He is a well known person in
Phoenix. He is my good friend and fellow practitioner.

Where I live has a lot to do with firearm control. I live in a very
safe place.

After reading the reaction of Americans to this tragedy I am convinced
that nothing will be done to curb the use of firearms. I say, keep
everything as it is and more good people should start carrying
concealed weapons.

All of them. Children too.

[Douglas]

ren wrote:
>>What does where you live have anything to do with this.
>>Besides you probably never did live in Phoenix and
>>probably didn't ever visit my gallery... esp. considering
>>past posts I dug up where people have pointed out
>>you often lie about visiting people.
>>
>>-Douglas
>
>
> But you don't know who Gabriel David is. He is a well known person in
> Phoenix. He is my good friend and fellow practitioner.
>

He must not be all that well known then. His name doesn't come up
in any of the local papers websites or on a general search of
arizona and the name "Gabriel David."


> Where I live has a lot to do with firearm control. I live in a very
> safe place.
>

Yes, in your mommy's basement.

> After reading the reaction of Americans to this tragedy I am convinced
> that nothing will be done to curb the use of firearms. I say, keep
> everything as it is and more good people should start carrying
> concealed weapons.
>
> All of them. Children too.
>
>

You change your tune quite often.

-Douglas

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 16:46:40 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>> What does where you live have anything to do with this.
>> Besides you probably never did live in Phoenix and
>> probably didn't ever visit my gallery... esp. considering
>> past posts I dug up where people have pointed out
>> you often lie about visiting people.
>>
>> -Douglas
>
>But you don't know who Gabriel David is. He is a well known person in
>Phoenix. He is my good friend and fellow practitioner.
>
http://www.mugshots.com/Most-Wanted/Gabriel+David+Sills.htm

[Barnabas Collins]

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:57:30 -0700, Douglas <***@cox.net>
wrote:

>> They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
>> plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.
>>
>
>Sounds like quite a few people I've known over the years... though
>they just write and have not killed anyone.
They could have said the same thing about Shakespeare....

>Probably went to a store where they sell guns, filled out the
>paperwork, waited, went back and picked up his guns. Didn't he
>have a receipt in his bag?
Yes. The serial numbers were filed off, he had a receipt in his
backpack.

All the paper work was in order according to Virginia law,
the most lax in the nation.

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 1:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:57:30 -0700, Douglas <***@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
> >> plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.
>
> >Sounds like quite a few people I've known over the years... though
> >they just write and have not killed anyone.
>
> They could have said the same thing about Shakespeare....
>
> >Probably went to a store where they sell guns, filled out the
> >paperwork, waited, went back and picked up his guns. Didn't he
> >have a receipt in his bag?
>
> Yes. The serial numbers were filed off, he had a receipt in his
> backpack.
>
> All the paper work was in order according to Virginia law,
> the most lax in the nation.

How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
purchasing a firearm exactly?

-Douglas

[Bassos]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 18, 1:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:

>
> How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
> purchasing a firearm exactly?

If guncontrol where so strict as it being illegal to possess one or buy one,
voila, no legally purchased gun for anyone.
(you silly mericains always trying to forcefit a concept into peacemeal
examples)

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 11:11 pm, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote:
> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:***@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 18, 1:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
> > purchasing a firearm exactly?
>
> If guncontrol where so strict as it being illegal to possess one or buy one,
> voila, no legally purchased gun for anyone.
> (you silly mericains always trying to forcefit a concept into peacemeal
> examples)

Doesn't work. Gun control takes firearms out of the
hands of law abiding citizens while criminals buy
and sell guns amongst themselves easily.

Gun control will never be able to remove all guns from
any society... much like it hasn't been able to remove
drugs.

No use in even discussing this with you because you
are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.

-Douglas

[Barnabas Collins]

On 19 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>No use in even discussing this with you because you
>are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
>
>-Douglas
And you're probably living in your dreasm where you think
you're in a Hollywood movie and you and kill the perp
and save the whole school with one shot.

In the real world if more people were armed we'd
be seeing headlines about 200 dead instead of 34.

[d***@gmail.com]

On Apr 19, 2:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:>No use in even discussing this with you because you
> >are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
>
> >-Douglas
>
> And you're probably living in your dreasm where you think
> you're in a Hollywood movie and you and kill the perp
> and save the whole school with one shot.
>

Not whatsoever. I've rec'd training in firearms use with
ex-Israeli paratrooper commandos and have been schooled
and practiced in realistic housing and field training facilities.

pics of my instructors and navy seals that often trained
with us: http://www.dagonproductions.com/hisardut.htm

I'd also insure he was dead by double tapping him.

I have no illusions of being a hero and the training I rec'd
reflects the goal of survival period.

> In the real world if more people were armed we'd
> be seeing headlines about 200 dead instead of 34.

Then provide some evidence in the way of statistics,
research that confirms your speculation.

-Douglas

[Barnabas Collins]

On 19 Apr 2007 15:16:35 -0700, ***@gmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 19, 2:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On 19 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:>No use in even discussing this with you because you
>> >are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
>>
>> >-Douglas
>>
>> And you're probably living in your dreasm where you think
>> you're in a Hollywood movie and you and kill the perp
>> and save the whole school with one shot.
>>
>
>Not whatsoever. I've rec'd training in firearms use with
>ex-Israeli paratrooper commandos and have been schooled
>and practiced in realistic housing and field training facilities.
And there'll still be alot of colateral damage.

No matter how well trained and careful you are most
of the time there will be colateral damage.

There are hundreds of thousands in Iraq who could testify
to that....expcept they're dead.

>
>pics of my instructors and navy seals that often trained
>with us: http://www.dagonproductions.com/hisardut.htm
>
>I'd also insure he was dead by double tapping him.
>
>I have no illusions of being a hero and the training I rec'd
>reflects the goal of survival period.
>
>> In the real world if more people were armed we'd
>> be seeing headlines about 200 dead instead of 34.
>
>Then provide some evidence in the way of statistics,
>research that confirms your speculation.
>
>-Douglas

[Nevermore]

In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:14:38 -0400
> Organization: None completely disorganized
>
> On 19 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>>No use in even discussing this with you because you
>>are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
>>
>>-Douglas
> And you're probably living in your dreasm where you think
> you're in a Hollywood movie and you and kill the perp
> and save the whole school with one shot.
>
> In the real world if more people were armed we'd
> be seeing headlines about 200 dead instead of 34.
>
That makes no sense. You think this guy stopped at 32 because he ran
out of ammo? He ran out of time. The police had finally reached,
breached, and entered the building. If he'd come across a teacher or
student who was armed in those few minutes that he had free reign the
number of deaths would have been even lower. They wouldn't have even
had to be "one shot - one kill" expert shooter. When he was kicking
the doors and trying to shoot his way through them the teacher could
have just emptied the clip right back out through the door.

You inane idea that more guns equals more shooting is belied completely
by the fact that there are already an estimated 300 million guns on the
North American continent. If more guns equalled more gun homicides we'd
all be dead. There are only 300 million Americans.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:06:12 -0500, Nevermore <***@thestake.net>
wrote:

>In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
>> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
>> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
>> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:14:38 -0400
>> Organization: None completely disorganized
>>
>> On 19 Apr 2007 11:29:23 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>>No use in even discussing this with you because you
>>>are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
>>>
>>>-Douglas
>> And you're probably living in your dreasm where you think
>> you're in a Hollywood movie and you and kill the perp
>> and save the whole school with one shot.
>>
>> In the real world if more people were armed we'd
>> be seeing headlines about 200 dead instead of 34.
>>
>That makes no sense. You think this guy stopped at 32 because he ran
>out of ammo? He ran out of time.
He also stopped at 32 because he killed himself.

>The police had finally reached,
>breached, and entered the building. If he'd come across a teacher or
>student who was armed in those few minutes that he had free reign the
>number of deaths would have been even lower. They wouldn't have even
>had to be "one shot - one kill" expert shooter. When he was kicking
>the doors and trying to shoot his way through them the teacher could
>have just emptied the clip right back out through the door.
I don't know what is more scary.....the perp going around killing
or the person trying to be a hero and save the world from this
perp. Doesn't matter. Either way you're just as dead.

Even if you're on the swat team you're not going to get the
perp without hiting innocent bystanders.

>
>You inane idea that more guns equals more shooting is belied completely
>by the fact that there are already an estimated 300 million guns on the
>North American continent. If more guns equalled more gun homicides we'd
>all be dead. There are only 300 million Americans.

[Bassos]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 18, 11:11 pm, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote:
>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Apr 18, 1:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
>> > purchasing a firearm exactly?
>>
>> If guncontrol where so strict as it being illegal to possess one or buy
>> one,
>> voila, no legally purchased gun for anyone.
>> (you silly mericains always trying to forcefit a concept into peacemeal
>> examples)
>
> Doesn't work.

Yes it does.

I already gave you the example of the country i live in.

> Gun control will never be able to remove all guns from
> any society... much like it hasn't been able to remove
> drugs.

So funny you scared puppies equate guns with the human search for drugs.

> No use in even discussing this with you because you
> are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.

Hee hee, yes yes unrealistic, fully actual utopia.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:11:18 +0200, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl>
wrote:

>
>"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> On Apr 18, 11:11 pm, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote:
>>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:***@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> > On Apr 18, 1:14 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> > How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
>>> > purchasing a firearm exactly?
>>>
>>> If guncontrol where so strict as it being illegal to possess one or buy
>>> one,
>>> voila, no legally purchased gun for anyone.
>>> (you silly mericains always trying to forcefit a concept into peacemeal
>>> examples)
>>
>> Doesn't work.
>
>Yes it does.
>
>I already gave you the example of the country i live in.
>
>> Gun control will never be able to remove all guns from
>> any society... much like it hasn't been able to remove
>> drugs.
>
>So funny you scared puppies equate guns with the human search for drugs.
>
>> No use in even discussing this with you because you
>> are so stuck in your unrealistic utopia.
As opposed to those stuck in their unrealistic utopia that
they will draw a gun and kill the perp witout hurting
a single bystander.


>
>Hee hee, yes yes unrealistic, fully actual utopia.
>
>

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 15:13:03 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
>purchasing a firearm exactly?

No gun purchase if you're mentally unstable, were involved in
several stalking incidents, or autistic.

[d***@gmail.com]

On Apr 19, 2:11 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2007 15:13:03 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> >How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
> >purchasing a firearm exactly?
>
> No gun purchase if you're mentally unstable, were involved in
> several stalking incidents, or autistic.

I just read about these situations regarding Cho. Seems like a
big problem is that Cho was that he shouldn't have been released by
the Dr. at the mental institution. Another big problem in society
is letting mentally ill people out of the hospital when they still
have problems. Why isn't this addressed more often as being a big
contributor to violent crime? It seems this would address where the
problem lies... which is with the person who uses a tool to harm
another rather than against the tools.

-Douglas

[Nevermore]

In <***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> ***@gmail.
com wrote:
> From: ***@gmail.com
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: 19 Apr 2007 15:04:07 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
>
> On Apr 19, 2:11 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 18 Apr 2007 15:13:03 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >How would a stricter gun control law have prevented Cho from
>> >purchasing a firearm exactly?
>>
>> No gun purchase if you're mentally unstable, were involved in
>> several stalking incidents, or autistic.
>
> I just read about these situations regarding Cho. Seems like a
> big problem is that Cho was that he shouldn't have been released by
> the Dr. at the mental institution. Another big problem in society
> is letting mentally ill people out of the hospital when they still
> have problems. Why isn't this addressed more often as being a big
> contributor to violent crime? It seems this would address where the
> problem lies... which is with the person who uses a tool to harm
> another rather than against the tools.
>
> -Douglas
>

This supposedly well-intentioned "mainstreaming" movement is putting
ever lunatic who would have been locked up in any other century out on
the streets and we are all asking a bunch of college students why they
didn't try harder to get along with this guy and put him on the right
path - come on, he never should have been in college in the first place.
If the mental health professionals can't make a dent in him what are a
bunch of people who have their own lives and classes to get together
going to do with him? We could cut a huge number of problems out of
our collective lives if we brought back mental institutions. Sure,
there were horrific abuses way back in those places but the solution
isn't to let the inmates run the asylum, or worse yet live on our
streets and in college dorms.

[Vigyazat]

ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote :

> I also want to know why the school did not alert everyone that there
> had been two previous murders that morning.

YOU want to know? Well, that'll shift 'em. After all, it's not like
anyone else is asking that question, but if REN wants to know, then the
feds are going to have to move heaven and Earth...

--
Vigyazat

[ren]

> YOU want to know? Well, that'll shift 'em. After all, it's not like
> anyone else is asking that question, but if REN wants to know, then the
> feds are going to have to move heaven and Earth...
>
> --
> Vigyazat

I can make it happin' ifn' I wan' to.

[Vigyazat]

ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote :

> I can make it happin' ifn' I wan' to.

No, ren: as with all your demonstrations of 'power', it's something that
will happen anyway, and you'll claim credit for it.

--
Vigyazat

[ren]

> Vigyazat

If it serves my purpose, then I will claim credit for it.

If I actually do something, perhaps I won't mention it at all.

[Douglas]

ren wrote:
>>Vigyazat
>
>
> If it serves my purpose, then I will claim credit for it.
>

Which is ren's admission to being a liar and a fraud.

> If I actually do something, perhaps I won't mention it at all.
>

Which happens so rarely, there really is nothing to mention.

-Douglas

[ren]

On Apr 19, 11:39 am, Douglas <***@cox.net> wrote:

> Which is ren's admission to being a liar and a fraud.

A fraud is someone who earns money from deception. Posting here costs
me money and time. How is this fraud?

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 19, 6:58 am, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 11:39 am, Douglas <***@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > Which is ren's admission to being a liar and a fraud.
>
> A fraud is someone who earns money from deception. Posting here costs
> me money and time. How is this fraud?

No. Try using Websters or the OED next time rather than relying
on your poor memory:

Main Entry: fraud
Pronunciation: 'frod
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English fraude, from Anglo-French, from Latin
fraud-, fraus
1 a : DECEIT, TRICKERY; specifically : intentional perversion of truth
in order to induce another to part with something of value or to
surrender a legal right b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting :
TRICK
2 a : a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : IMPOSTOR;
also : one who defrauds : CHEAT b : one that is not what it seems or
is represented to be
synonym see DECEPTION, IMPOSTURE

-Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"ren" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> Very true. For the record he is from South Korea and was here
>> since he was 8 years old.
>
> They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
> plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.
>
> But they do not mention how he obtained those pistols. I want to know.
>
> I also want to know why the school did not alert everyone that there
> had been two previous murders that morning.
>
> I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
> murder that now happens all the time.
>
The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
university allowed gun control to happen. If they had allowed students to
carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot long
before he killed himself. No one ever talks about the shootings that were
prevented because the school principal or someone else rushed to their car
and shot the bastard. I wonder why.

I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors to keep
guns in the classroom so when something like this happens again (and it
will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that many people. Also have
you noticed how criminals don't follow laws? I'm pretty sure there is a law
saying no murder, yet people murder people. Who's to say the next killer
will obey the gun control laws?

The blood is on the hands of the anti gun people who banned guns at that
university, plain and simple (and the killer of course who was probably on
anti depressants or something like the Columbine murderers).

Finally I would like to know why the cowardly police hid behind trees for 2
hours (or more) and allowed this massacre to happen. Just like they did in
other massacres.

That's my rant for the day, reply or ignore its your choice.

[ren]

> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
> university allowed gun control to happen. If they had allowed students to
> carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot long
> before he killed himself. No one ever talks about the shootings that were
> prevented because the school principal or someone else rushed to their car
> and shot the bastard. I wonder why.

I am wondering why too. I am having conflicting divination results
about the suicide of Cho. Did he commit suicide? Why does my
divination indicate 4 people involved in this plot?

> I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors to keep
> guns in the classroom so when something like this happens again (and it
> will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that many people. Also have
> you noticed how criminals don't follow laws? I'm pretty sure there is a law
> saying no murder, yet people murder people. Who's to say the next killer
> will obey the gun control laws?

I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.

[Brett]

On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> muttered
intensely:


>> I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors to keep
>> guns in the classroom so when something like this happens again (and it
>> will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that many people. Also have
>> you noticed how criminals don't follow laws? I'm pretty sure there is a law
>> saying no murder, yet people murder people. Who's to say the next killer
>> will obey the gun control laws?
>
>I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.
>

And I say that I don't want people to carry guns unless they are
familiar and comfortable with their use.

I say this as a gun owner, a member of the NRA and a holder of a
concealed carry permit.

I used to go to the same range as a lot of police and gang members.
Now I'm a fair shot, but I'm not the best guy out there. However, I
was light years ahead of more than 90% of the police I fired next to
and the gang members were not even in the same universe. I used to
openly laugh at gang members on the range, right to their faces,
because they couldn't hit shit. They'd stare daggers at me, then look
at my targets and swallow their pride.

I don't want a bunch of untrailed yahoos with guns thinking that they
can just whip them out and start blasting next time something happens,
or too many innocent bystanders are going to be hurt.

You want to carry a weapon, you damn sure better know how to use it.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:11:52 GMT, Brett <***@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>And I say that I don't want people to carry guns unless they are
>familiar and comfortable with their use.
I also want them to pass a background check, get training,
pass a pshcology screeening, and keep the gun locked up.

With freedom comes responsibility. Along with the freedom
to own a gun comes the responsibility to keep the gun out
of hands of a two year old who will kill himself with it.

[seon ferguson]

"Barnabas Collins" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:11:52 GMT, Brett <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>>And I say that I don't want people to carry guns unless they are
>>familiar and comfortable with their use.
> I also want them to pass a background check, get training,
> pass a pshcology screeening, and keep the gun locked up.
>
> With freedom comes responsibility. Along with the freedom
> to own a gun comes the responsibility to keep the gun out
> of hands of a two year old who will kill himself with it.
>
Or a nut who will murder 30 of his fellow students.

[ren]

On Apr 19, 3:11 am, Brett <***@earthlink.net> wrote:

> You want to carry a weapon, you damn sure better know how to use it.

I am a sharp-shooter, Brett. My father and my uncle taught me to shoot
when I was 7 years old. I can fire shotguns and full-auto assault
rifles too. Heavy weapons as well.

I am specially trained in handling firearms.

[Douglas]

ren wrote:
> On Apr 19, 3:11 am, Brett <***@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>You want to carry a weapon, you damn sure better know how to use it.
>
>
> I am a sharp-shooter, Brett. My father and my uncle taught me to shoot
> when I was 7 years old. I can fire shotguns and full-auto assault
> rifles too. Heavy weapons as well.
>
> I am specially trained in handling firearms.
>

Sure you are. More taking credit for something you haven't
done because it suits you.

-Douglas

[ren]

> Sure you are. More taking credit for something you haven't
> done because it suits you.
>
> -Douglas

You don't know me.

[hY]

ren wrote:
>> Sure you are. More taking credit for something you haven't
>> done because it suits you.
>>
>> -Douglas
>
> You don't know me.

No, but it seems he has a hard on for you.

[seon ferguson]

"Brett" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> muttered
> intensely:
>
>
>>> I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors to
>>> keep
>>> guns in the classroom so when something like this happens again (and it
>>> will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that many people. Also
>>> have
>>> you noticed how criminals don't follow laws? I'm pretty sure there is a
>>> law
>>> saying no murder, yet people murder people. Who's to say the next killer
>>> will obey the gun control laws?
>>
>>I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.
>>
>
> And I say that I don't want people to carry guns unless they are
> familiar and comfortable with their use.
>
> I say this as a gun owner, a member of the NRA and a holder of a
> concealed carry permit.
>
> I used to go to the same range as a lot of police and gang members.
> Now I'm a fair shot, but I'm not the best guy out there. However, I
> was light years ahead of more than 90% of the police I fired next to
> and the gang members were not even in the same universe. I used to
> openly laugh at gang members on the range, right to their faces,
> because they couldn't hit shit. They'd stare daggers at me, then look
> at my targets and swallow their pride.
>
> I don't want a bunch of untrailed yahoos with guns thinking that they
> can just whip them out and start blasting next time something happens,
> or too many innocent bystanders are going to be hurt.
>
> You want to carry a weapon, you damn sure better know how to use it.

You bring up a good point that I completely forgot about. I was all hung up
on the second amendment that I forgot about the most important thing about
gun's, gun safety. If you think teachers who don't know gun safety is bad
think about the students. Maybe we should train the teachers or add more
security guards with guns.

[Nevermore]

In <4626b91c$0$25463$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> seon
ferguson wrote:

> Maybe we should train the teachers or add more
> security guards with guns.

Far cheaper to arm and train a handful of teachers in most schools than
to provide guards. Start with those who have military experience and
work out from there.

[seon ferguson]

"Nevermore" <***@thestake.net> wrote in message
news:20070419091522998-***@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In <4626b91c$0$25463$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> seon
> ferguson wrote:
>
>> Maybe we should train the teachers or add more
>> security guards with guns.
>
> Far cheaper to arm and train a handful of teachers in most schools than
> to provide guards. Start with those who have military experience and
> work out from there.

Yep agreed besides the security guards will probably end up being as useless
as the police.

[Nevermore]

In <46280363$0$25477$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> seon
ferguson wrote:
> From: "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Revelation is Needed
> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:03:32 +1000
>
>
> "Nevermore" <***@thestake.net> wrote in message
> news:20070419091522998-***@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>> In <4626b91c$0$25463$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
>> seon ferguson wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe we should train the teachers or add more
>>> security guards with guns.
>>
>> Far cheaper to arm and train a handful of teachers in most schools
>> than to provide guards. Start with those who have military
>> experience and work out from there.
>
> Yep agreed besides the security guards will probably end up being as
> useless as the police.
>
Exactly. Unfortunately this is a phenomena that is so rare and so fast
that the assets have to be in place in advance at the very time and room
it occurs. These guys are undoubtedly crazy but they also plan
carefully. I don't really know whether or not an unknown amount of
weapons mixed into the campus would deter them but the most important
thing isn't out-thinking them - its stopping them as fast as possible
once they start.

[Satyr]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:11:52 +0000, Brett wrote:

> On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> muttered
> intensely:
>
>>> I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors
>>> to keep guns in the classroom so when something like this happens
>>> again (and it will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that
>>> many people. Also have you noticed how criminals don't follow
>>> laws? I'm pretty sure there is a law saying no murder, yet people
>>> murder people. Who's to say the next killer will obey the gun
>>> control laws?
>>
>>I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.
>
> And I say that I don't want people to carry guns unless they are
> familiar and comfortable with their use.
>
> I say this as a gun owner, a member of the NRA and a holder of a
> concealed carry permit.
>
> I used to go to the same range as a lot of police and gang members.
> Now I'm a fair shot, but I'm not the best guy out there. However, I
> was light years ahead of more than 90% of the police I fired next to
> and the gang members were not even in the same universe. I used to
> openly laugh at gang members on the range, right to their faces,
> because they couldn't hit shit. They'd stare daggers at me, then
> look at my targets and swallow their pride.
>
> I don't want a bunch of untrailed yahoos with guns thinking that
> they can just whip them out and start blasting next time something
> happens, or too many innocent bystanders are going to be hurt.
>
> You want to carry a weapon, you damn sure better know how to use it.

Exactly. Becoming proficient with a firearm takes a fair investment of
time and effort. Without it, you're most likely to either injure
yourself or an unintended target.

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I am wondering why too. I am having conflicting divination results
>about the suicide of Cho. Did he commit suicide? Why does my
>divination indicate 4 people involved in this plot?

Maybe your divination is also picking up reruns of
Threes Company?

[seon ferguson]

"Barnabas Collins" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I am wondering why too. I am having conflicting divination results
>>about the suicide of Cho. Did he commit suicide? Why does my
>>divination indicate 4 people involved in this plot?
>
> Maybe your divination is also picking up reruns of
> Threes Company?

If so how can I do that?

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 07:40:03 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.
Oh great....so the teacher can use it when he finds
a student in the hall without a hall pass.

[seon ferguson]

"ren" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
>> university allowed gun control to happen. If they had allowed students to
>> carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>> long
>> before he killed himself. No one ever talks about the shootings that were
>> prevented because the school principal or someone else rushed to their
>> car
>> and shot the bastard. I wonder why.
>
> I am wondering why too. I am having conflicting divination results
> about the suicide of Cho. Did he commit suicide? Why does my
> divination indicate 4 people involved in this plot?
>
You don't need to be a divination expert to wonder how one lone nut could
have carried enough ammo to fire about 60 shots and not be over powered. I
don't think he is the only one involved.


>> I say we need to bring more guns to campuses and allow professors to keep
>> guns in the classroom so when something like this happens again (and it
>> will) the bastard can be shoot before he kills that many people. Also
>> have
>> you noticed how criminals don't follow laws? I'm pretty sure there is a
>> law
>> saying no murder, yet people murder people. Who's to say the next killer
>> will obey the gun control laws?
>
> I agree that teachers should start carrying pistols.
>
>
Finally we can agree on something.

[Nevermore]

In <4626b89d$0$25446$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> seon
ferguson wrote:

> You don't need to be a divination expert to wonder how one lone nut
> could have carried enough ammo to fire about 60 shots and not be over
> powered. I don't think he is the only one involved.

You can fit two 15-round clips in your pants pocket. He was wearing an
ammo vest.

[seon ferguson]

"Nevermore" <***@thestake.net> wrote in message
news:20070419091030646-***@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In <4626b89d$0$25446$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> seon
> ferguson wrote:
>
>> You don't need to be a divination expert to wonder how one lone nut
>> could have carried enough ammo to fire about 60 shots and not be over
>> powered. I don't think he is the only one involved.
>
> You can fit two 15-round clips in your pants pocket. He was wearing an
> ammo vest.

Maybe I guess because its so crazy it just doesn't smell right. I'm sure
that's how people felt about Columbine. I can't remember what I felt all I
remember was hearing about it.

[Rosifer]

On Apr 18, 11:40 pm, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I am having conflicting divination results about the suicide of Cho.... Why does my
> divination indicate 4 people involved in this plot?

Have you considered the most likely and obvious answer?



Rosifer

[Barnabas Collins]

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
<***@iinet.net.au> wrote:

>If they had allowed students to
>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot long
>before he killed himself.
And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>
> <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >If they had allowed students to
> >carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot long
> >before he killed himself.
>
> And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.

Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.

Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>
>> <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> >If they had allowed students to
>> >carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>> >long
>> >before he killed himself.
>>
>> And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>
> Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>
Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less casualties
because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about them? Could it
be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the one's like the
latest one because the media loves bad news?

[Douglas]

seon ferguson wrote:
> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>>
>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If they had allowed students to
>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>>>>long
>>>>before he killed himself.
>>>
>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>
>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>>
>
> Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less casualties
> because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about them? Could it
> be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the one's like the
> latest one because the media loves bad news?

That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
direction, it's still speculation.

-Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
news:***@cox.net...
>
>
> seon ferguson wrote:
>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>>>
>>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>If they had allowed students to
>>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>>>>>long
>>>>>before he killed himself.
>>>>
>>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>>
>>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>>>
>>
>> Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
>> casualties because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about
>> them? Could it be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the
>> one's like the latest one because the media loves bad news?
>
> That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
> firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
> direction, it's still speculation.
>

Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
everyone is quiet.

I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that were
stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably fall on
death ears.

[Douglas]

seon ferguson wrote:
> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:***@cox.net...
>
>>
>>seon ferguson wrote:
>>
>>>"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>>>>
>>>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>If they had allowed students to
>>>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>>>>>>long
>>>>>>before he killed himself.
>>>>>
>>>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>>>
>>>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
>>>casualties because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about
>>>them? Could it be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the
>>>one's like the latest one because the media loves bad news?
>>
>>That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
>>firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
>>direction, it's still speculation.
>>
>
>
> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
> everyone is quiet.
>
> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that were
> stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably fall on
> death ears.

I don't doubt if a decent study could actually be managed that it
would turn up some statistics that would make many people rethink
their ideas about gun control.

-Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
news:***@cox.net...
>
>
> seon ferguson wrote:
>> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:***@cox.net...
>>
>>>
>>>seon ferguson wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>>>>>
>>>>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If they had allowed students to
>>>>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>>>>>>>long
>>>>>>>before he killed himself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>>>>
>>>>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
>>>>casualties because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about
>>>>them? Could it be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the
>>>>one's like the latest one because the media loves bad news?
>>>
>>>That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
>>>firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
>>>direction, it's still speculation.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
>> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
>> everyone is quiet.
>>
>> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that
>> were stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably
>> fall on death ears.
>
> I don't doubt if a decent study could actually be managed that it
> would turn up some statistics that would make many people rethink
> their ideas about gun control.
>
I just wish I could figure out how to go about doing something like that.

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 19, 3:03 am, "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:***@cox.net...
>
>
>
> > seon ferguson wrote:
> >> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
> >>news:***@cox.net...
>
> >>>seon ferguson wrote:
>
> >>>>"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> >>>>>wrote:
>
> >>>>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>
> >>>>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>If they had allowed students to
> >>>>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
> >>>>>>>long
> >>>>>>>before he killed himself.
>
> >>>>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>
> >>>>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>
> >>>>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
> >>>>casualties because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about
> >>>>them? Could it be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the
> >>>>one's like the latest one because the media loves bad news?
>
> >>>That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
> >>>firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
> >>>direction, it's still speculation.
>
> >> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
> >> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
> >> everyone is quiet.
>
> >> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that
> >> were stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably
> >> fall on death ears.
>
> > I don't doubt if a decent study could actually be managed that it
> > would turn up some statistics that would make many people rethink
> > their ideas about gun control.
>
> I just wish I could figure out how to go about doing something like that.

Problem is that most crimes utilizing a firearm are reported while
many instances of a firearms being used to thwart crimes are not.

-Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:***@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 19, 3:03 am, "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:***@cox.net...
>>
>>
>>
>> > seon ferguson wrote:
>> >> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
>> >>news:***@cox.net...
>>
>> >>>seon ferguson wrote:
>>
>> >>>>"Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> >>>>news:***@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >>>>>On Apr 18, 1:53 pm, Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>>On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>>
>> >>>>>><***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>>>If they had allowed students to
>> >>>>>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been
>> >>>>>>>shot
>> >>>>>>>long
>> >>>>>>>before he killed himself.
>>
>> >>>>>>And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>
>> >>>>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
>>
>> >>>>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
>> >>>>casualties because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know
>> >>>>about
>> >>>>them? Could it be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as
>> >>>>the
>> >>>>one's like the latest one because the media loves bad news?
>>
>> >>>That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
>> >>>firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
>> >>>direction, it's still speculation.
>>
>> >> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die
>> >> in
>> >> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of
>> >> guns
>> >> everyone is quiet.
>>
>> >> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that
>> >> were stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will
>> >> probably
>> >> fall on death ears.
>>
>> > I don't doubt if a decent study could actually be managed that it
>> > would turn up some statistics that would make many people rethink
>> > their ideas about gun control.
>>
>> I just wish I could figure out how to go about doing something like that.
>
> Problem is that most crimes utilizing a firearm are reported while
> many instances of a firearms being used to thwart crimes are not.
>
Yep and people wonder why so many people hate the 2nd ammendment.

[Lilah Morgan]

<<Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
everyone is quiet.>>

I forget how the discussion came about, but once my mother and I were
talking, and I asked her if she could save 100(or maybe it was 1000, don't
remember) by killing one person, would she do it? And she just flat out
refused to answer it. She likes to ignore situations where there's really
tough decisions to make.
I can understand not wanting to kill someone, but I'd rather have one
person's blood on my hands than a few dozen or more. Morality isn't going to
be much comfort when you're surrounded by the bodies of those you could have
saved. I do believe in the "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" mode
of thinking. Guns are simply the tool people use to achieve their objective.
If someone wants to kill people, it's not gonna matter whether or not
they're able to get their hands on a gun. They will find a way. Guns simply
just make it easier for them to take out more people in a shorter period of
time. I think that on the specific issue of gun control, it should be all or
nothing, meaning either everyone who wants one should be allowed to get one,
or NO ONE is allowed to own one, because A: you never really know when
someone is gonna go mental and shoot up a place(sometimes an everyday
occurence can just be the last straw), so you can't really accurately
'profile' who's a 'fit' owner(like felons not being allowed to own
guns...what if it's not a violent crime, what if it's white collar?). And B:
Someone could steal a gun from someone deemed a 'fit' owner and use that to
kill a bunch of people. Because again, if someone wants to kill someone,
they will find a way regardless. And as for statistics, I heard a really
good one on the TV a few weeks ago...10 out of 10 people die! So much for
statistics lying :-)

[Bassos]

"seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:4626e374$0$25436$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:***@cox.net...
>>
>>
>> seon ferguson wrote:
>>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
>> That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
>> firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
>> direction, it's still speculation.
>>
>
> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
> everyone is quiet.

You are making things up for all of us, so guess it's even.

What you consider the made up statistics to be of how many people die by gun
use is unclear.
(not the actuall bonafide statistics i reckon)

> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that
> were stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably
> fall on death ears.

And once again an example of the silly american way of trying to forcefit a
concept into readily overseeable examples.

Wooptiedoo if anyone cites an example.
examples mean squat.

btw, you'd think that a country that loves to adore (and subsequently
thrash) heroes, anyone 'saving' the day by killing someone would be a hot
media target.

[seon ferguson]

"Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46270958$0$79139$***@news.xs4all.nl...
>
> "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:4626e374$0$25436$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "Douglas" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:***@cox.net...
>>>
>>>
>>> seon ferguson wrote:
>>>> "Dagon Productions" <***@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>
>>> That is a problem... there are no statistics for how often a
>>> firearm thwarts a crime... thus even though I lean in your
>>> direction, it's still speculation.
>>>
>>
>> Yep people have no problem making up statistics of how many people die in
>> shootings but when it comes to how many people save lives because of guns
>> everyone is quiet.
>
> You are making things up for all of us, so guess it's even.
>
> What you consider the made up statistics to be of how many people die by
> gun use is unclear.
> (not the actuall bonafide statistics i reckon)
>
>> I'd point to the University of Texas massacre and other massacres that
>> were stopped because of a brave hero using his gun but it will probably
>> fall on death ears.
>
> And once again an example of the silly american way of trying to forcefit
> a concept into readily overseeable examples.
>
> Wooptiedoo if anyone cites an example.
> examples mean squat.
>
> btw, you'd think that a country that loves to adore (and subsequently
> thrash) heroes, anyone 'saving' the day by killing someone would be a hot
> media target.
>
Actually I love in Australia, where our rights to own guns have been taken
away from us. I will agree on one thing though if someone did try to stop a
massacre today in the states they probably would have been shot by the
police. Something has happened to the once great country of America and the
recent massacre proves it.

[Barnabas Collins]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:37:05 +1000, "seon ferguson"
<***@iinet.net.au> wrote:

>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less casualties
>because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about them? Could it
>be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the one's like the
>latest one because the media loves bad news?
>
In that case it was shaer luck. Too often alot of innocent
bystanders would be shot.

[seon ferguson]

"Barnabas Collins" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:37:05 +1000, "seon ferguson"
> <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>>Nope just look at the other shootings that resulted in even less
>>casualties
>>because a principle got his gun. Oh wait you don't know about them? Could
>>it
>>be because the media doesn't focus on them as much as the one's like the
>>latest one because the media loves bad news?
>>
> In that case it was shaer luck. Too often alot of innocent
> bystanders would be shot.

No it was sheer bravery and sheer use of the second ammendment rights.

[Barnabas Collins]

On 18 Apr 2007 15:17:32 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.
Not any worse than the speculation that some have where if
they were armed they'd be able to take out the shooter
in one shot with nobody getting killed. That may happen
in the movies but not in real life.

[Nevermore]

In <***@4ax.com> Barnabas Collins wrote:
> From: Barnabas Collins <***@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:17:00 -0400
> Organization: None completely disorganized
>
> On 18 Apr 2007 15:17:32 -0700, Dagon Productions <***@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>>Sounds like wild speculation on both your parts.

> Not any worse than the speculation that some have where if
> they were armed they'd be able to take out the shooter
> in one shot with nobody getting killed. That may happen
> in the movies but not in real life.
>
According to the FBI most one-on-one gunfights that involve a trained
person shooting back last an average of less than three (3) seconds!
That means that in most encounters involving someone who has had law
enforcement style combat shooter training the sequence of events is
"bang! - BANG! - it's over." It's only in the movies and a few
engagements (usually at extended ranges) where long weapons or a great
deal of cover is involved that end up in drawn out multi-round
engagements.

And we still haven't heard you document any instances where counter-fire
has mowed down herds of bystanders (tick, tick, tick, tick....)

[seon ferguson]

"Barnabas Collins" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
> <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>>If they had allowed students to
>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot long
>>before he killed himself.
> And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>
Nope not if all the students knew gun safety and were well trained (and back
in the good old days they would have been). Remember that other college
massacure in the 60's where that nut was shooting people from the tower? I
forget its name but if that patriot hadnt used his gun to kill him way more
people would have died.

But no people like you and the moronic president of that college want to
disarm victims so next time something like this happens there will be more
dead and even more idiots calling for us to abolish the second amendment.

So what do you propose? We ban guns and allow those cowardly police who hid
behind trees and allowed the massacre to happen carry them? Yes more power
to our oppressors.

[Bassos]

"seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:4626e218$0$25440$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Barnabas Collins" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:43:38 +1000, "seon ferguson"
>> <***@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>>If they had allowed students to
>>>carry guns, or just staff, then that evil maniac would have been shot
>>>long
>>>before he killed himself.
>> And along with him 199 other people would also be dead.
>>
> Nope not if all the students knew gun safety and were well trained

Hee hee.

> (and back in the good old days they would have been).

Lol.
Back when would that be ?

<snip examples mean squat>

> But no people like you and the moronic president of that college want to
> disarm victims

it is a wanting to disarm everyone.

scared people like you that need a gun to feel safe are the reason guns are
not illegal.
(and not some silly protection from tyranny)

> so next time something like this happens there will be more dead and even
> more idiots calling for us to abolish the second amendment.

There ya go, from the most deaths in a school shooting of all time to your
expectation that next time will be even worse.

Perhaps it is a 'break records' mentality kind of thing.

> So what do you propose?

Ban all firearms.

Use the propaganda machine to change the attitude of the populace.
(tv and hollywood)

> We ban guns and allow those cowardly police who hid behind trees and
> allowed the massacre to happen carry them?

hee hee.

>Yes more power to our oppressors.

how dramatic.

[seon ferguson]

> Lol.
> Back when would that be ?
>
Back in the 60's, back when people were allowed to bring guns to schools or
there were shooting ranges in New York.
> <snip examples mean squat>
>
>> But no people like you and the moronic president of that college want to
>> disarm victims
>
> it is a wanting to disarm everyone.
>
> scared people like you that need a gun to feel safe are the reason guns
> are not illegal.
> (and not some silly protection from tyranny)
>
No the reasons they are legal is because of the second amendment.

At least I want to defend myself. You're the type who will let the maniac
line you up with 20 of your fellow classmates and kill each one of them. At
least I don't want to go down without a fight. Not some silly protection
from tyranny? So I suppose fema stealing New Orleans citizens guns didn't
count as tyranny. I suppose it was good that they stole their guns or
tackled old women. I suppose it was good that they blocked aid. I'm sure
after the next 911 you'll be licking the boots of those fema agents who are
forcing you into a concetration camps and loving martial law.

> Use the propaganda machine to change the attitude of the populace.
> (tv and hollywood)
>
Ah yes use propaganda, just like your neocon buddies to.

Even if all guns were banned a psychopath could still get his hands on a gun
from the black market.


>> We ban guns and allow those cowardly police who hid behind trees and
>> allowed the massacre to happen carry them?
>
> hee hee.
>
The police really tried to save those students from getting their brains
blown out, didn't they?


>>Yes more power to our oppressors.
>
> how dramatic.
>
Please oppress us and take our rights away for our own safety. Please disarm
us so when a psycho nut goes crazy I can't do anything to protect myself.

[Bassos]

"seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:46274214$0$25441$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> Lol.
>> Back when would that be ?
>>
> Back in the 60's, back when people were allowed to bring guns to schools
> or there were shooting ranges in New York.
>> <snip examples mean squat>
>>
>>> But no people like you and the moronic president of that college want to
>>> disarm victims
>>
>> it is a wanting to disarm everyone.
>>
>> scared people like you that need a gun to feel safe are the reason guns
>> are not illegal.
>> (and not some silly protection from tyranny)
>>
> No the reasons they are legal is because of the second amendment.
>
> At least I want to defend myself. You're the type who will let the maniac
> line you up with 20 of your fellow classmates and kill each one of them.

Hee hee, you know my type, good show.

> At least I don't want to go down without a fight.

Soo afraid, so terribly afraid.

> Not some silly protection from tyranny?

The reason americains have an armed populace.

> So I suppose fema stealing New Orleans citizens guns didn't count as
> tyranny.

Indeed.

> I suppose it was good that they stole their guns or tackled old women.

Hee hee.

> I suppose it was good that they blocked aid. I'm sure after the next 911
> you'll be licking the boots of those fema agents who are forcing you into
> a concetration camps and loving martial law.

I am not an americain.

>> Use the propaganda machine to change the attitude of the populace.
>> (tv and hollywood)
>>
> Ah yes use propaganda, just like your neocon buddies to.

Hee hee, *my* buddies.

> Even if all guns were banned a psychopath could still get his hands on a
> gun from the black market.

Most likely yes.

Still means squat.

>>> We ban guns and allow those cowardly police who hid behind trees and
>>> allowed the massacre to happen carry them?
>>
>> hee hee.
>>
> The police really tried to save those students from getting their brains
> blown out, didn't they?

Perhaps there is some sort of process the police follows ?

>>>Yes more power to our oppressors.
>>
>> how dramatic.
>>
> Please oppress us and take our rights away for our own safety.

You are the one that can feel opressed.

> Please disarm us so when a psycho nut goes crazy I can't do anything to
> protect myself.

If the psycho nut is also disarmed, he is a lot less scary.

[Bassos]

"seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
> university allowed gun control to happen.

Hee hee.
Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as long
as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.

> If they had allowed students to carry guns, or just staff, then that evil
> maniac would have been shot long before he killed himself.

More guns for less killing is like fighting for peace or fucking for
chastity.

[Brett]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:06:33 +0200, "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl>
muttered intensely:

>
>"seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
>> university allowed gun control to happen.
>
>Hee hee.
>Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as long
>as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.

So then it's not much different than your nursing your anger at
everything and everyone.

[seon ferguson]

"Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:46270715$0$331$***@news.xs4all.nl...
>
> "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
>> university allowed gun control to happen.
>
> Hee hee.
> Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as
> long as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.
>
Someone would have shoot the killer if they had allowed guns on campus. The
deaths might still be 10 or 15 but at least it wont be so bad.
>> If they had allowed students to carry guns, or just staff, then that evil
>> maniac would have been shot long before he killed himself.
>
> More guns for less killing is like fighting for peace or fucking for
> chastity.
>
So I supose less guns will equal less crime to?

[Nevermore]

In <46270715$0$331$***@news.xs4all.nl> Bassos wrote:
> From: "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:06:33 +0200
>
>
> "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
>> university allowed gun control to happen.
>
> Hee hee.
> Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as
> long as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.
>
>> If they had allowed students to carry guns, or just staff, then that
>> evil maniac would have been shot long before he killed himself.
>
> More guns for less killing is like fighting for peace or fucking for
> chastity.

Ho ho ho. Except that's not true. In the cities that have banned guns
entirely crime and killing have gone through the roof because the
criminals know that only the law abiding citizens will be disarmed.
Washington DC is the classic example. Walk through a high-crime
neighborhood there and ask residents how grateful they are that no one
is allowed to own a gun.

By the way, you want to actually stop year after year after year of mass
rapes and killings in Darfur? Pass out handguns to the women in the
refugee population, everything else is talk and empty gestures.

Nevermore

[Dagon Productions]

On Apr 19, 5:11 am, Nevermore <***@thestake.net> wrote:
> In <46270715$0$331$***@news.xs4all.nl> Bassos wrote:
> > From: "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl>
> > Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
> > Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
> > Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:06:33 +0200
>
> > "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> >> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
> >> university allowed gun control to happen.
>
> > Hee hee.
> > Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as
> > long as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.
>
> >> If they had allowed students to carry guns, or just staff, then that
> >> evil maniac would have been shot long before he killed himself.
>
> > More guns for less killing is like fighting for peace or fucking for
> > chastity.
>
> Ho ho ho. Except that's not true. In the cities that have banned guns
> entirely crime and killing have gone through the roof because the
> criminals know that only the law abiding citizens will be disarmed.
> Washington DC is the classic example. Walk through a high-crime
> neighborhood there and ask residents how grateful they are that no one
> is allowed to own a gun.
>
> By the way, you want to actually stop year after year after year of mass
> rapes and killings in Darfur? Pass out handguns to the women in the
> refugee population, everything else is talk and empty gestures.
>
> Nevermore

Heh, don't expect to get anywhere with bassos... his mind
is made up and he doesn't give a hoot about facts whatsoever.

-Douglas

[seon ferguson]

"Nevermore" <***@thestake.net> wrote in message
news:20070419081008484-***@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In <46270715$0$331$***@news.xs4all.nl> Bassos wrote:
>> From: "Bassos" <***@zonnet.nl>
>> Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca,alt.magick
>> Subject: Re: Gun Control is Needed
>> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:06:33 +0200
>>
>>
>> "seon ferguson" <***@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:4625da42$0$25462$***@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>> The reason that massacre happened is because the idiot staff at that
>>> university allowed gun control to happen.
>>
>> Hee hee.
>> Blame, more blame, we neeeeeeddd something to blame, anything, just as
>> long as i can keep my warm fuzzy feeling with my gun.
>>
>>> If they had allowed students to carry guns, or just staff, then that
>>> evil maniac would have been shot long before he killed himself.
>>
>> More guns for less killing is like fighting for peace or fucking for
>> chastity.
>
> Ho ho ho. Except that's not true. In the cities that have banned guns
> entirely crime and killing have gone through the roof because the
> criminals know that only the law abiding citizens will be disarmed.
> Washington DC is the classic example. Walk through a high-crime
> neighborhood there and ask residents how grateful they are that no one
> is allowed to own a gun.
>
> By the way, you want to actually stop year after year after year of mass
> rapes and killings in Darfur? Pass out handguns to the women in the
> refugee population, everything else is talk and empty gestures.
>
Yep your 100% right, its a pitty people like Barnabas dont listen to the
facts.

[Barnabas Collins]

On 17 Apr 2007 16:31:27 -0700, ren <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>They talk about how quiet and anti-social Cho was. They talk about the
>plays of murder he wrote in creative writing class.
Now be careful there. They could have said the same thing about
Stephen King's writings.

>But they do not mention how he obtained those pistols. I want to know.
He bought one of them legally five weeks ago in Roanoake.

Presumably he bought the second one legally too.

>I also want to know why the school did not alert everyone that there
>had been two previous murders that morning.
Because they thought the two shootings earlier were a
domestic incident, they thought they had the
person who did it in custody.

>I also want to know why the U.S. never does anything after a big mass
>murder that now happens all the time.
Because too many people think they should have a right to carry
a deadly weapon like they need an assault weapon to take down
that vicious bambi.