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

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...

Irrelevant.

Totally relevant except you've now snipped the context.

Graham

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Hard ? They're forever bursting into tears over here.



But they were useless for anything even before !

Dunno how you could say that about Gary Linneker. A pretty smart cookie.

Good footballers need a bit of brain you know.

 

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...

No, I wouldn't.

I'm simply trying to tell an intellect of treacle that as handguns were
banned in 1998, any handgun crime recorded since then will be committed
(apart from exceptionally rare, legally held ones - like 1 a year if
that) with illegally held guns.

Good. That means there aren't likely to be any significant number of deaths resulting
from legally held guns doesn't it ?

Now we just need a crackdown on the illegal ones.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...


You must haved damned big pockets if you can conceal a .22 free pistol.


Rhubarb. With lots of custard.

The original purpose of hand guns was most certainly not target shooting. Nor
hunting.

So what do you think it is ?

Graham

 

[Neil Barker]

But the fact remains the hand gun was invented for the express purpose of
killing people and has no other use.

You can keep trotting that falacious line out from here to eternity. I
and others will also continue to tell you that there are perfectly
legitimate other reasons for owning handguns - target shooting being
one of them.

So, to say they have no other use than killing people is simply
incorrect. But, to say otherwise wouldn't help your weakening case now,
would it ?

 

[Steve Firth]

You surprise me. I have never applied for a license, so I don't know the
details, but I had been informed that pump action weapons and automatic
weapons were unlicensable except to the armed forces and the police.

Care to educate us as to he levels of licensing? Or do you just want to
appear superior

Pump action shotguns are not banned explicitly, but a shotgun
certificate restricts the owner to a gun which has a magazine capable of
holding no more than two cartridges. In the case of a pump action
shotgun this is actually a limit of three, two in the magazine and one
in the chamber.

In the terms of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, a shotgun that has no
magazine or has a non-detachable magazine incapable of holding more than
two cartridges is classed as "exempted from the requirement to hold a
firearms certificate."

To obtain a firearms certiicate needs the user to show justification to
the police for owning a firearm. A shotgun certificate does not require
the same level fo justification. Hence if Mr B could show justification
for the ownership of a pump action shotgun and could pass examination of
that reason by his Firearms Liason Officer then he can hold one, but not
on a shotgun certificate.

Pump action shotguns with a magazine holding just two cartridges are not
common. And IIRC adapting a 10 cartidge pump action to a 2 cartridge
magazine is not acceptable. I may be wrong on that last part, but I can
recall someone complaining in 1988 that the polcie had told him his gun
would be confiscated and he would not be permitted to have it engineered
to reduce the magazine capacity.

Sadly, the police don't always conform to the letter of the law in these
matters and aren't above bending the truth slightly to get the result
they desire. So it's not always possible to take police pronouncements
on matters at face value.

 

[Neil Barker]

I keep on asking people like you what it was invented for if not killing
man? But they are all strangely quiet on this one while prattling on
about sports etc.

*Sigh*

What is was invented for and what other legitimate uses an item has now
are not connected. Owning a handgun for target shooting would be a
perfectly legitimate other use of a handgun. They are not, despite what
you would like all and sundry to believe, solely for killing things.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

No Graham, it does disprove what you say in a roundabout way..... People
who want to kill, will kill. Period. Guns, knives, sarin, ricin, cyanide,
bombs, etc ad infinitum ad nauseum.....
Britain just doesn't quite have the criminals that we have here- yet.
Yet you tolerate Islamofascists preaching genocide on the corners in
Londonistan.....

Ssssh..

Of course we do. It makes them careless and gives us time to place our
people in their organisations.

It took a LONG time to get the IRA infiltrated to the point where they
had a stark choice: sue for peace or get wiped out.

Now its amazingly a fact that we have not had another terrorist attack
since the underground bombings.

The War on Terror is being won by small very brave Muslims who are
risking their lives to tell the intelligence what in fact is really
going on.

Not by bible and gun toting arseholes from the mid west,with dreams of
ethnic cleasing.

Your time will come; i will pray for you all, as I have friends in the
UK.

I am surprised. That you have friends at all.

I guess you have hooked up with the National Front.

 

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...

ROTFLMAO !

The 'recommended' device for eradication of vermin is most certainly
NOT a shotgun.

That's what my friend who once had 9 acres used to have for the task.

The government publishes a list of different 'vermin'
and lists the approved calibres for their humane dispatch. You won't
see 'shotgun' on many at all.

Typically .22 for small vermin such as rabbits, .22-250 / .223 for fox
and generally .243 upwards for deer.

Deer, you may not realise, can be classes as 'vermin'. Anyone trying to
dispatch a deer with a shotgun needs their head examing and certificate
removing from them. The only way to kill a deer with a shotgun, apart
from at point-blank range which is simply not viable, is using solid-
slugs - which are not available to section-2 certificate holders.

I can't imagine many people wanting to kill deer as vermin in this country. Unlike
the Americans, we don't seem to have the same urge to kill wild animals.

Graham

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Haven't heard about that - which one? It sounds perilously close to a
"thought crime".

Andy

Incitement to violence or somesuch.

 

[Eeyore]

AFAIK, and I'm happy to be corrected, the law on penknives hasn't changed.

Try taking one on a aplane.

Graham

 

[Steve Firth]

Thanks for confirming gun lovers have had their brains removed.

The first pistols fired shot. According to you shot is "a development of
throwing things" so if anyone had their brain removed...

 

[Steve Firth]

I have to think long and hard for any way in which one can be used other
than to threaten the life of a human being.

Why do you have to think long and hard? Does target shooting threaten
the life of a human being?

 

[Steve Firth]

Thanks for confirming it has nothing to do with the ban.

I did no such thing.

As you and others implied. You might speculate the ban has had no effect
on illegally held guns - but that would be just speculation. I might
speculate the problem would have been much worse without the ban.

In your case it would be speculation, since you have no knowledge of
what would have happened if there were no ban. In my case it's not
speculation, there was a ban and it has not met its objective.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

AFAIK, and I'm happy to be corrected, the law on penknives hasn't changed.

Indeed, they have always been illegal if the blade is more than some
stupid distance long. As are kitchen knives.


Technically driving around with a carving knife in the boot of your car
is 'in possession of a concealed offensive weapon' or something.

IIRC the law - if you can afford a good enough lawyer - hinges on you
having a reasonable excuse to be in possession.

Which didn't help the scout campers when they were arrested for having
penknives, (and charged and convicted, too).

 

[Eeyore]

I keep on asking people like you what it was invented for if not killing
man? But they are all strangely quiet on this one while prattling on
about sports etc.

Simply because they have no answer !

The idea that guns were originally invented for sport is utterly bizarre. It
just goes to show how out of touch with reality the pro-gun lobby is.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

And I asked you for your explanation why. But of course got no answer.

Because it relates to illegally held guns, it's irrelevant to the isue of the
law anyway. It does mean we now need to turn to eradicating the illegally held
guns of course.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"It's a development of throwing things".

Using a barrel is a strange way to 'throw' things.

A trebuchet (siege engine) is a development of throwing things. A gun is NOT.

Graham

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Ungrateful twit.

No., that's you. We took the brunt of it, you sat back and made a
fucking PROFIT.

How many people personally known to you have relatives who died in that
conflict? In my case it has to be 'every single one', apar from a
handful whose families arrived in Europe post that conflict.

You know almost nothing of what it means to have aible thumper and
wannabe policeman who gets his kicks out of dreaming about pumping
bullets into the bad guys.

 

[Eeyore]

Would you care to list how many Olympic boxers have been "maimed"?

Why Olympic ?

Would you care to list how many boxers have brain damage ?

Graham