Re: UK RICS report says solar takes 208 years to repay...nonsense! Help needed!

[Steve Firth]

And properly trained unlike in America.

de Menezez wasn't shot because we have special armed police, he was shot
because of a failure in 'intelligence'.

No he was shot because of a failure in intelligence.

 

[Steve Firth]

You're not making any sense.

I'm makign perfect sense, the problem for you is that you're emoting and
writing drivel.

FWIW the restriction on guns for target shooting is plain silly imho. They
could easily be securely stored.

Indeed, but lame-brains arguing like yourself had anyone who used a gun
for sport pilloried for something done by a maniac. Perhaps you could
engage your brain before making stupid statements about the function and
purpose of guns and the motives of those who own them?

 

[Doctor Drivel]

You didn't. You sold them to us on credit at a crippling rate of interest.

The vast majority of British military equipment was British made - the
British even exported some to Russia, they made so much. The only US items
used extensively was the Jeep (a small run-about) and the Sherman tank,
which wasn't that brilliant either. It was only ever any good when the
British converted it to the Firefly and put a 17 pounder gun on it sideways,
and then it could knock out a Tiger tank. The US wouldn't use them because
they didn't make it and many US tankers were killed because of that.

The US appreciated British RADAR, jet engines, RR Merlin engines, etc. The
US provided much raw materials, wheat and the likes, no so much finished
goods. Sorry to dispel the myth.

 

[Andy Hall]

I suppose there are places, like Russia, that have large areas already
contaminated with lots of radioactive material. One method to deal with
nuclear waste would be to ship it there and just dump it on the ground.
Maybe put up a warning sign.

This is still off topic for all of these newsgroups.

Anthony

I wouldn't have thought so. For the homepower one, it would depend on
the size of your home.

Don't limit the scope of your thinking

 

[Arnold Walker]

Guns are unique in the above that their sole PURPOSE is to harm people.
They
have no other function.

Graahm

Not totally ,some areas they have bombs for that purpose and even strap them
on or leave them in British subways.

 

[Doctor Drivel]

So? You said that the sole purpose or rather PURPOSE was to harm people.
And "They have no other function." That was and remains, drivel.

Hand guns were invented so officers could shoot their own men. A supposes a
man is a target of some description.

 

[Arnold Walker]

It'll be better still when they get paid 10% or less of the insane
salaries they
get now.

Graham

Is there a pro sport where that isn't true?

 

[Eeyore]

Of course they can, otherwise snipers wouldn't get very far.

Cocealed on the body silly.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

the ban has served no purpose and has not restricted the numbers of illegal
guns available to
criminals.

There's absolutely no way of knowing that.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

since the government banned legally owned and
licenced guns, the death rate has risen.

Wrong.

http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF07.htm

1997 when the new Act came in : 201 deaths

2003 :163 deaths,

Graham

 

[Steve Firth]

I think he's claiming that they are specially trained units rather than
just PC Plod like in the USA.

He's doing no such thing, he's doing the usual Drivel tactic of talking
crap and being too stupid to admit that he made a mistake. He certainly
has not argued that these are "specially trained units" as you allege.

Are you arguing that US police officers have no weapons training? Are
you claiming that the UK training is somehow infinitely superior to the
US training?

You're wrong on both counts if you are.

And both of you are wrong if you think that police officers don't go
onto British streets, armed, on a regular basis.

 

[Steve Firth]

This is the usual American story. My wife will be raped, my children
murdered in their beds etc ..... That's merely because you're in the USA
and it's a very violent society, but even so, how often does that actually
happen ?

In the UK I think I can confidently say NEVER.

That is as much utter baloney as anything you have said so far. Murder,
rape, arson, child abduction and burglary are serious problems in the
UK, committed by strangers on innocents. To attempt to claim otherwise
if absolute hokum.

Look up:
Angus Robertson Sinclair (murdered at least 13 people in their homes
and as they approached their homes)

Jill Dando - murdered on her own doorstep.

Cheryl Moss - murdered on a break from work.

McFadden and Spark - murdered a complete stranger Robert Gardner for
a tin of beer.

And the murder of the Laitner family:

28-year-old Robert Laitner was stabbed to death in his bedroom in the
Sheffield suburb of Dore. His father solicitor Basil Laitner went
upstairs to investigate the noise and was also stabbed to death.
Basil's wife, Avril was downstairs and was stabbed twenty-six times.
Returning upstairs the assailant then attacked the youngest of the
Laitners' daughters, Nicola. She was repeatedly raped by the
intruder, recently escaped criminal Arthur Hutchinson. Hutchinson had
been charged with rape in a different case but escaped from custody.

Which has all the elements you contrive above, together in one case,
something you claim "confidently" has never or rather NEVER happened.

Do you think writing words in capital letters makes the statement true?

 

[Steve Firth]

Gun ownership in Switzerland is not as widespread as the gun lobby likes
to make out. A lot of them are militrary rifles too, not handguns.

Wrong on both counts, again. Military rifles in Switzerland are separate
from guns owned by the private individual. Possession of guns for
hunting is extremely common and pistols are owned for personal
protection. A Swiss citizen would be shocked to hear anyone think that
would even consider using a military rifle for anything other than civil
defence.

And yes, I did live there for a number of years.

 

[Steve Firth]

Whoosh! Just *look* at those goalposts move!

It's bollocks anyway.

 

[Eeyore]

It was there in the post that you replied to and you snipped that
material without comment.

Personal ownership (which is what's dangerous) is not required for target
shooting.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

So? You said that the sole purpose or rather PURPOSE was to harm people.
And "They have no other function." That was and remains, drivel.

Guns were not invented for the PURPOSE of target shooting. No-one thought "I
wonder how we can put some holes in this piece of card, let's invent a gun" did
they ? Target shooting is simply something else thay can be used for.

The original purpose of target shooting is to practice KILLING.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Indeed, but lame-brains arguing like yourself had anyone who used a gun
for sport pilloried for something done by a maniac. Perhaps you could
engage your brain before making stupid statements about the function and
purpose of guns and the motives of those who own them?

You're mistaken. I was against the excessive restrictions on target shooting.

Graham

 

[Arnold Walker]

I think even a few tens of years calms the stuff down quite a lot.

Graham

If you are talking tritium or stromium 90 totally decayed is more like it.
One other thing .....one wonders about is talking about sealing everything
in sight.
Not recycling or the eco impact of the unmined nuke material ....many speak
of a grain
creating mass disaster at every corner.What about the tons in the ground
unmined on mass disaster?
Are we to believe that we have naturally occuring toxic waste sites?
Dating back before the pyamids,etc.,etc......
Maybe moses should have been arranging a super fund to clean up Nevada and
Austrialia.
And Noah checking his ark insurance policy for radiation poisoning from
uranium fields in Libya.
(Sort of unclear on whether he knew where he was ...much less if he cruised
over Libya)

 

[Doctor Drivel]

You didn't "give" them. We bought them.
OK, you loaned us the money,

Initially they never loaned anything and payment had to be in gold. When
they did "sell" materials, it was for the indirect protection of the USA.
So, they "sold" us arms to fight to protect them. What a deal they got.
They only came into the conflict when a large part of their fleet was wiped
out and Germany declared war on them.

but you got it paid back. There
was very little charity involved.

Little charity? There was none whatsoever.

 

[Eeyore]

The vast majority of British military equipment was British made - the
British even exported some to Russia, they made so much. The only US items
used extensively was the Jeep (a small run-about) and the Sherman tank,
which wasn't that brilliant either. It was only ever any good when the
British converted it to the Firefly and put a 17 pounder gun on it sideways,
and then it could knock out a Tiger tank. The US wouldn't use them because
they didn't make it and many US tankers were killed because of that.

The US appreciated British RADAR, jet engines, RR Merlin engines, etc. The
US provided much raw materials, wheat and the likes, no so much finished
goods. Sorry to dispel the myth.

The USA did supply us with a lot of those Merlin engines btw.

Graham