Why americans scare me

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh dear. Now you have me convinced. And I who thought that they were biased and selected facts that suited their purpouses. Little did I know that they had said in the openings statement that it was all true. That makes all the difference.

Come on - you can't seriously try to convince me that they are not biased, just because they say that they are not. It is not a question of fabricating facts - it is a question of selecting facts that suit your goal and ignore the other.<span id='postcolor'>

Find me a media outlet that ISN'T biased, and I will buy you a beer. So does that mean all anti-gun people and sites are not biased? It seems to me like they do the most fact twisting and leave the most out.

I've gone throguh it and they are just trying to de-bunk most of the myths involved in the gun debate with a little common sense, that's all.

Tyler

[Oligo 1]

"Ofcourse it is, it is an attack on society itself. On the other hand, its a part of their job."

Killing a cop cannot be any worse than killing any citizen. Otherwise you would be implying that cops are better human beings than normal people. Definitely not so, but they are equal.

Some extremists might even say that when you kill a cop, you kill a 'combatant', since cops have willingly accepted the risk of death when joining the force (just like soldiers do). Thus, killing a cop is actually not as bad as killing a 'civilian' bystander. According to this reasoning, armed robbers are 'combatants' also.

[STS_SolidSnake 0]

i want this

[Longinius 1]

"Killing a cop cannot be any worse than killing any citizen. Otherwise you would be implying that cops are better human beings than normal people. Definitely not so, but they are equal."

Well, as far as I see it, killing a cop is worse than killing a civilian because when you go against the police, you show total lack of respect towards the society as a whole. It is a matter of opinion however. I also happen to think that striking an officer, paramedic or firefighter is worse than striking Joe Benny on the street.

As for sniper cover and shooting people. I am quite sure most police officers, in Sweden atleast, would be out of action if you shot them in the leg or something like that. They are not super hero Rambo's, they have families to.

Recently two police officers were executed by three bank robbers. The cops followed the robbers, who stopped and opened fire on the policecar. The police got out, returned fire and were wounded. The robbers then walked over to the car and executed the two with their own service pistols. They tried to kill a third one later with grenades and automatic fire, but he survived. Incidently, the leader of this gang served time with the leader of the Military Gang. The MG leader immidiatly went public and told the copkillers to surrender and take their medicine. Quite a difference in how they viewed the use of arms. The MG used weapons to shock people into control. The other guys just wanted to kill people.

[Oligo 1]

"Well, as far as I see it, killing a cop is worse than killing a civilian because when you go against the police, you show total lack of respect towards the society as a whole. It is a matter of opinion however. I also happen to think that striking an officer, paramedic or firefighter is worse than striking Joe Benny on the street."

That's a different way of seeing things, I guess. But I really fail to see how you can show more lack of respect towards society than by killing Joe Benny on the street. I'd say you pretty much declare your total resignation from the society and all of its values with such act. On the other hand, the cops are often directly on your way threatening your freedom (if you're a criminal), so killing them is more understandable than killing random civilians, since you had a reason (self-defence). Thus you're not necessarily a complete psychopath. I'll stick to my opinions, but I respect your view (your view is what the cops themselves probably think), so we don't need to debate this issue further. BTW, killing paramedics or firefighters is just as killing civilian bystanders = really sick.

"As for sniper cover and shooting people. I am quite sure most police officers, in Sweden atleast, would be out of action if you shot them in the leg or something like that. They are not super hero Rambo's, they have families to."

What I meant was that if you have a cop covered with four rifles and you tell him to put down his weapon and get the fuck out (you're using the same ROE as the cops), some cops might not obey you, believing that theirs is the position of ultimate authority, unable to grasp the idea that they're outmaneuvered and outgunned. This sort of thing gets people killed.

"Recently two police officers were executed by three bank robbers. The cops followed the robbers, who stopped and opened fire on the policecar. The police got out, returned fire and were wounded. The robbers then walked over to the car and executed the two with their own service pistols. They tried to kill a third one later with grenades and automatic fire, but he survived. Incidently, the leader of this gang served time with the leader of the Military Gang. The MG leader immidiatly went public and told the copkillers to surrender and take their medicine. Quite a difference in how they viewed the use of arms. The MG used weapons to shock people into control. The other guys just wanted to kill people."

There definitely is a difference between killing a cop in a firefight, because you had no other options, and executing a cop. I find executions repugnant and sick, regardless whether they are committed by individuals or the state. So the MG leader was quite correct in telling those psychotic morons to take their medicine and go back to the nuthouse. The only disciplined and the most effective way to use weapons is to shock people into control. Hell, you even get less jailtime if you do it like that.

[Longinius 1]

The MG leader got 12 years. I am not sure what the copkillers got. I doubt it was much more though, oddly. One of the killers, Jackie Arklöv, got lifetime sentence. In Sweden, it isn't really life though. So, he will get out sooner or later. Hopefully later.

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i want this

 <span id='postcolor'>

LOL

Does she come with ammo?

[Guest]

Yeah, I remember Militärligan. They were smart enough to rob small towns, where the police force was small and insatsstyrkan (Swedish SWAT) was too far away to react in time. Their method was just as Longinius told to park a van with a KSP58 (FN MAG) in the town center and rob all the banks at once. The police couldn't approach since they were outgunned. The robberies were highly disciplined and executed in military style. Nobody got hurt.

As for the Malexander event (the cop killing that Longinius talked about) - it was a rare event in Sweden. One might add that one of the cop killers was later shot in the back by the police. They were all quickly captured (well, one actually fled to South America, but came back) and got life (which in Sweden means something like max 25 ys and probably the half). Bthe media attention and outcome it got a very clear message - killing a cop is the worst thing you could do.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ April 03 2002,10:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Find me a media outlet that ISN'T biased, and I will buy you a beer.    So does that mean all anti-gun people and sites are not biased? It seems to me like they do the most fact twisting and leave the most out.

I've gone throguh it and they are just trying to de-bunk most of the myths involved in the gun debate with a little common sense, that's all.

Tyler<span id='postcolor'>

All media is biased. Some is more then other. You would have objected if I gave you a reference for statistics from an anti-gun organization.

I still think that it is very biased in terms of leaving relevant facts out. For instance their comparison between USA and Switzerland, saying that gun-density doesn't have anything to do with crimes and pointing out that there are a lot of guns in Switzerland and a few homocides. The situation is Switzerland is in no way comparable to the one in the States. You can't buy guns over the counter and it is a hard to get a license there as there is in any other European state. The difference is that their military is organized like a national guard. The soldiers keep the weapons at home, locked up, I should add. They are not allowed to use them. The ammo that they get is counted.

So the situation is entirely different, yet they try to imply that it is the same. See my point?

[Longinius 1]

The scariest thing of it all was that one of the Malexander killers, Jackie Arklöv, is a former mercenary. He was active during the balkan conflict and was actually captured and put in jail for crimes against humanity. I think he got life sentence down there for how he had treated civilians. The Swedish government does their damndest to get him home and once here they release him. A couple of years later he shoots two cops. Its really pathetic. It is worth mentioning that he belongs to a Nazi organisation, and he is colored.....geesh....

[Guest]

What was even worse was that two of the robbers/killers were already in jail. They were released home for a leave (yes, in Sweden criminals get out of prison a maximum of a weekend every two weeks if they have behaved).

[USSoldier11B 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What was even worse was that two of the robbers/killers were already in jail. They were released home for a leave (yes, in Sweden criminals get out of prison a maximum of a weekend every two weeks if they have behaved). <span id='postcolor'>

"Guns don't kill people, soft judges do."

[Oligo 1]

"The MG leader got 12 years. I am not sure what the copkillers got. I doubt it was much more though, oddly."

It is kind of silly that you get about the same sentence for robbing a load of banks and killing a bunch of people, execution style. Either the people with the money (rich individuals and corporations) have lobbed the property protection laws to be ridiculously tight or then they aren't giving you enough time for killing people.

Be it as it may, the punishment for simple theft (no weapons or threatening even involved) is way too high in my opinion. There was this moron who broke in to my place of employment and stole a crappy PC. The cops got him and he actually got jail-time for stealing something like 1000 euros worth of stuff... Ridiculous.

"Bthe media attention and outcome it got a very clear message - killing a cop is the worst thing you could do. "

I understand that the cops get pissed if one of their own is killed (although ideally they shouldn't), but the reaction of the public always eludes me. I guess people WANT a police force, which doesn't give a fuck if some John Oridinaries are killed, but goes nuts if one of their beloved brethren is slain.

If the rule-set is like that, maybe the smart criminal should invest in non-lethal munitions to incapacitate, but not kill, the police officers, who by the way are firing their hollow point bullets designed to fragment in people for maximum damage... The irony.

[Longinius 1]

Yeah, I thought about that. Criminals going out of their way not to kill while robbing would probably win the support of the citizens. I mean, people nearly supported Militärligan. Just like one other famous bankrobber who once aborted a robbery because there was a pregnant woman in the bank. Once he saw her, he shouted to his friend to pull back and leave. And they did. People admired and respected that for some reason.

[Oligo 1]

It's the same old story, man: 'The Romantic Outlaw'. Why do you think there are tons of movies depicting robberies from the robber point of view? People love individuals who have the resolve to step outside the common rules and make their own rules. As long as only faceless institutions get hurt. If people get hurt, only then it gets associated with the real world.

[LauryThorn 0]

Funny scene happened in Tampere, Finland, about 2 years ago.

Couple of students were dressed up like terrorists, having

fake AK-47's and all that stuff. It's difficult to explain why they do that..

Anyway, they needed a pen, and went to a bank nearby to

get one. Of course, bank people made alert, police came,

and no one had fun anymore..

Nobody got shot, just the students got prosecuted if I remember right.

[DarkLight 0]

Seeing all this stuff, i'm surprised that some people wonder where those kids who kill other students in schools get their weapons from....

I must admit that it all looks pretty cool but there's a limit, no person younger than 18 or 21 should fire a gun. Yeah i know this sounds crappy cuz there are lots of ppl that are younger than 18 and these ppl are careful with guns and know how to handle them. The bad thing is that there always are some idiots who can't handle weapons and who do crazy shit with 'em.

If you really wanne shoot a gun, get an air rifle, one of my friends has an air powered sniper rifle. It's very accurate and it's very cool, at least with that rifle you can't have accidents so fast.

I recently read something in the papers or something and it says that the most accidents with firearms happen in the USA, second is Switserland (probable spelled totally wrong but you know what i mean, aaight? ) and third is Belgium !!

I'm pretty schocked cuz Belgium is third (i live in B.), never thought this could happen, every day at least one person dies here by accident by a gun...

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Yeah right, Switzerland! Bull- and Cowshit! Cant be! What about the ancient States of the USSR, What about .... well I could list a thousand countries. No way Belgium is ahead of those (dont forget that Belgium's population is probably 1/1 cows to human ). Or do your cows carry firearms!

Je rigole

[DarkLight 0]

Personally i don't understand what the fuck is wrong with all you ppl!

Belgium's population is probably 1/1 cows to human?

You probable haven't been here once!!! Do you really believe everything that everybody tells you? Sheesh man, i'm so damn tired of ppl thinking that Belgium is a country full of stupid farmers (no offense to farmers). When you say the name Belgium, ppl immediatly think about dumb farmers who have nothing more than cows and other animals... It's all countryside stuff, that's what everybody thinks. Yes there are many farmers here (especially in the East part) but there are lots of other stuff too. Belgium is a rich country that has one of THE BEST educating systems in the WHOLE DAMN WORLD so how many ppl do you think still care about farming here? When there's the opportunity to earn a huge amount of money, there aren't a lot of farmers... Oh and there ARE a lot of guns in this country too, and a lot of dangerous stuff happen here.

It's not cuz this is a small country that we don't have a lot of criminality, some really serious stuff happend here (one of these is "de bende van Nijvel", translated to english that would be something like "the gang of Nijvel" , these guys have killed many ppl without giving a damn and even today there still isn't any real proof about who did it), cities like Antwerp, Brussels, Mechelen,... can be very dangerous at night.

I'm not attacking you Albert Schweizer, you're a really nice and cool guy and i have a lot of respect for you and all the other Forum members. I'm just a bit sick of ppl that say stuff that was correct 50 years ago but that is totally wrong in these days... just like the cow thing

Now... i said my thing Lets get back to the "accident with guns" thing, i'm not talking about all the ppl that got killed together in one country. I'm talking about the scale of the whole population on 100 (Sry if this isn't really clear to you, i don't know all those hard words in English ) that had this accident, so the population doesn't really matter...

Ofcourse it is possible that i made a mistake while reading the article, i while re-read it when i find it again and perhap you are right. We'll see...

[christophercles 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Joe Porta @ April 02 2002,11:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Shouldint she be playing with a Dolls house or something    <span id='postcolor'>

When i was seven i was firing a g6 mounted in a leopard . To whoever asked who would mount a telescopic site on an smg- whoever wants too i hate a telescopic site mounted on my ruger .22, and my slug gun.

Also, on the topic of spud guns, My uncle and i built a special "orange gun" (because we built it in an farming area where they grow lots of citrus and grapes) that is powered by aerosole gas and can fire in an arc for a range of about 500 metres and can blow right through corrugated alluminium. And the police dont seem to care. Thier standing on it is- "cool".

[miss_cleo 0]

who cares if someone intentionaly or accidentaly kills themself?

its just natural selection weeding out the idiots

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Miss_Cleo @ April 03 2002,21:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">who cares if someone intentionaly or accidentaly kills themself?

its just natural selection weeding out the idiots<span id='postcolor'>

Sure, that is one way of looking at it, but what about kids that get their parent's gun and start playing with it?

[LordZach 0]

then the parents should be held accountable for not properly teaching their kids about firearms

[rpc007 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USSoldier11B @ April 03 2002,05:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well as of 1999, and it is lower now, the US had 5.7 homicides / 100,000 peeps <span id='postcolor'>

Uh, yeah what is the population of your country? More people means more criminals. Also take into account that we have more urbanized areas (inner city slums) than you do, hence more crime. Most of these crimes are commited with weapons that were obtained illegally. (Like Columbine)

In the town I grew up in almost everyone owned guns. # of homicides in a 20 year period = 0.<span id='postcolor'>

well i bet the population of my country is the same as yours, i was responding to someone saying that we had 9 homicides/100000 a year but it is less then 5.7

[rpc007 0]

in the US it is illegal to not have a lock on your gun when ur not using it so, if parents were following the law the kids wouldnt get hurt by playing with a gun same with if they teach their kids about guns...... i first shot an M60 when i was in fifth grade.....