Gunloon massacres in the USA a daily event

"Buck Mulligan" wrote in message
...
In talk.politics.guns "maximilian smith"
wrote:


"Buck Mulligan" wrote in message

I thought the NIU guy had a shotgun.

Correct - plus another gun. How does that relate to my comment? The
point wasn't about what this demented bloke had, but why someone like
him could walk into a gunshop and take one off the shelf and go kill
people with it - with no regulations apart from proving they have a
driver's licence.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You must
be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think

Nobody gives a **** what you think anyone else thinks.

I've told the oaf over and over that hoplophobia is treatable, but he
refuses treatment. I guess their sorry-assed socilialized medicine won't
foot the bill, and we know full well how desperately poor he is.

"maximilian smith" wrote in message
...

"PLMerite" wrote in message

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You must
be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think that more guns = less guncrime.

The weeky gun massacres proove the hapless gunloons wrong.

But still they defend their toys...


Stay in England where you're "safe" and STFU.

Not many gunloon massacres here, innit

Of course when the muzzies start running things

Why would 1% of the population take over?


Crime rate soars as criminals walk free
Observer investigation reveals Labour failure to halt slide in convictions

a.. David Rose
b.. The Observer,

The true picture of rising levels of violent crime in England and Wales and
historically low conviction rates can be revealed today by The Observer.
An investigation shows that conviction rates for many of the most violent
crimes have been in freefall since Labour came to power in 1997 and are now
well below 10 per cent. The chronically low figures for convictions come at
the same time as reports that violent crime is increasing.

An analysis of Home Office figures reveals that only 9.7 per cent of all
'serious woundings', including stabbings, that are reported to the police
result in a conviction. For robberies the figure falls to 8.9 per cent and
for rape, it is 5.5 per cent.

The figures show that, 10 years after Tony Blair pledged to be 'tough on
crime, tough on the causes of crime', the chances of getting away with rape,
robbery, sexual assault or seriously wounding another person have never been
higher.

The Observer's analysis presents a fresh political challenge to the new Home
Secretary, John Reid, who is struggling to get a grip over a department that
he has described as 'not fit for purpose'. The figures show that recorded
totals of these types of crime have risen steeply and while convictions have
risen a little, they have not kept pace.

The record under Labour is worst for two crimes that arouse deep public
concern. Serious woundings have risen by more than half in 10 years to
almost 20,000 attacks each year, but their conviction rate has fallen from
14.8 to 9.7 per cent. Nearly 13,000 rapes were recorded by police in the
year from April 2004, double the total for 1997, and over the period the
conviction rate collapsed from 9.2 to 5.5 per cent. There was, however, a
fall in the number of burglaries and the conviction rate for them rose - but
only by 0.5 per cent.

The fall in total conviction rates began under the Tories in 1980 and Labour
promised, before it won the 1997 election, that it would put this trend into
reverse. Despite its failure to do so, Labour's ministers have claimed
repeatedly that serious crime has been falling.

The Home Office insisted in a written statement yesterday that 'long term
trends show substantial declines in levels of violent crimes'. The former
Home Secretary Charles Clarke claimed earlier this year that the main
problem society faces is not crime but the fear of it, and he set up a
working party to investigate ways of making people believe the official
position - that the huge rises in the levels of recorded violent and sexual
crime are illusory, the result of more victims having the confidence to go
to the police.

But The Observer investigation shows that since 1980, serious woundings have
more than quadrupled, and recorded rapes have increased nearly elevenfold.

Last night, the country's top police officers working in the field rejected
the claim that these figures did not reflect a real increase in the
incidence of such crimes.

Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys and the Association of Chief
Police Officers (Acpo) spokesman on domestic violence and sex crime, who
heads a team of more than 20 researchers, said: 'I don't think you can
sensibly deny that there is a higher incidence of rape and a more routine
use of violence, and also of weapons-based violence where it used to be
fists and feet.'

He was backed by another Acpo expert, Leicestershire Chief Constable Matt
Baggott, and also by Crown Court judges spoken to by The Observer. According
to Baggott, the surge in late-night drinking was exposing young people to
higher risks of both physical and sexual violence.

He called for a full debate on this shift in social habits: 'We need to line
up the data from the health service with what we get from the police. There
is a profit-driven competitiveness around alcohol and one of its
consequences is young people becoming victims. We need to begin a
fundamental, objective analysis of what has been happening.'

Judges said that serious offences of this type were not only more common,
but had become more brutal and degrading. Crown Court judges said that they
were routinely hearing horrifying cases that were once so rare that they
would have been reserved for members of the High Court bench.

Last week, John Reid, echoing a pledge made earlier by the Prime Minister,
promised to 'rebalance criminal justice' in order to 'to make the public
feel safe again ... I won't rest until the law and the justice system works
for law-abiding people, not criminals.'

However, The Observer's investigation reveals that fewer than a third of the
20,000 people acquitted of serious offences in the Crown Court last year
owed their freedom to 'not guilty' verdicts by judges, not juries. Cases
were often discharged by judges, usually when the prosecution decided not to
proceed - because cases were not ready, because victims or other witnesses
withdrew or had been intimidated, or because Crown Prosecution Service
lawyers decided that the evidence was 'unreliable'.

The answer, said judges, was not to make sweeping changes in the law to
reduce suspects' protections, and hence risk wrongful convictions, but to
find ways of getting the CPS and the police to work more closely together
when investigating crimes so that the evidence is more watertight.



------------------------



Whew! What a ******** to live in. All that crime and no way to protect
themselves. I guess they're only engles that the world won't miss, so what
the ****....

On 17 Feb, 18:46, "Seth Hammond" wrote:
"maximilian smith" wrote in message

...







"PLMerite" wrote in message

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You must
be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think that more guns = less guncrime.

The weeky gun massacres proove the hapless gunloons wrong.

But still they defend their toys...

Stay in England where you're "safe" and STFU.

Not many gunloon massacres here, innit

Of course when the muzzies start running things

Why would 1% of the population take over?

Crime rate soars as criminals walk free
Observer investigation reveals Labour failure to halt slide in convictions

* a.. David Rose
* b.. The Observer,

The true picture of rising levels of violent crime in England and Wales and
historically low conviction rates can be revealed today by The Observer.
An investigation shows that conviction rates for many of the most violent
crimes have been in freefall since Labour came to power in 1997 and are now
well below 10 per cent. The chronically low figures for convictions come at
the same time as reports that violent crime is increasing.

An analysis of Home Office figures reveals that only 9.7 per cent of all
'serious woundings', including stabbings, that are reported to the police
result in a conviction. For robberies the figure falls to 8.9 per cent and
for rape, it is 5.5 per cent.

The figures show that, 10 years after Tony Blair pledged to be 'tough on
crime, tough on the causes of crime', the chances of getting away with rape,
robbery, sexual assault or seriously wounding another person have never been
higher.

The Observer's analysis presents a fresh political challenge to the new Home
Secretary, John Reid, who is struggling to get a grip over a department that
he has described as 'not fit for purpose'. The figures show that recorded
totals of these types of crime have risen steeply and while convictions have
risen a little, they have not kept pace.

The record under Labour is worst for two crimes that arouse deep public
concern. Serious woundings have risen by more than half in 10 years to
almost 20,000 attacks each year, but their conviction rate has fallen from
14.8 to 9.7 per cent. Nearly 13,000 rapes were recorded by police in the
year from April 2004, double the total for 1997, and over the period the
conviction rate collapsed from 9.2 to 5.5 per cent. There was, however, a
fall in the number of burglaries and the conviction rate for them rose - but
only by 0.5 per cent.

The fall in total conviction rates began under the Tories in 1980 and Labour
promised, before it won the 1997 election, that it would put this trend into
reverse. Despite its failure to do so, Labour's ministers have claimed
repeatedly that serious crime has been falling.

The Home Office insisted in a written statement yesterday that 'long term
trends show substantial declines in levels of violent crimes'. The former
Home Secretary Charles Clarke claimed earlier this year that the main
problem society faces is not crime but the fear of it, and he set up a
working party to investigate ways of making people believe the official
position - that the huge rises in the levels of recorded violent and sexual
crime are illusory, the result of more victims having the confidence to go
to the police.

But The Observer investigation shows that since 1980, serious woundings have
more than quadrupled, and recorded rapes have increased nearly elevenfold.

Last night, the country's top police officers working in the field rejected
the claim that these figures did not reflect a real increase in the
incidence of such crimes.

Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys and the Association of Chief
Police Officers (Acpo) spokesman on domestic violence and sex crime, who
heads a team of more than 20 researchers, said: 'I don't think you can
sensibly deny that there is a higher incidence of rape and a more routine
use of violence, and also of weapons-based violence where it used to be
fists and feet.'

He was backed by another Acpo expert, Leicestershire Chief Constable Matt
Baggott, and also by Crown Court judges spoken to by The Observer. According
to Baggott, the surge in late-night drinking was exposing young people to
higher risks of both physical and sexual violence.

He called for a full debate on this shift in social habits: 'We need to line
up the data from the health service with what we get from the police. There
is a profit-driven competitiveness around alcohol and one of its
consequences is young people becoming victims. We need to begin a
fundamental, objective analysis of what has been happening.'

Judges said that serious offences of this type were not only more common,
but had become more brutal and degrading. Crown Court judges said that they
were routinely hearing horrifying cases that were once so rare that they
would have been reserved for members of the High Court bench.

Last week, John Reid, echoing a pledge made earlier by the Prime Minister,
promised to 'rebalance criminal justice' in order to 'to make the public
feel safe again ... I won't rest until the law and the justice system works
for law-abiding people, not criminals.'

However, The Observer's investigation reveals that fewer than a third of the
20,000 people acquitted of serious offences in the Crown Court last year
owed their freedom to 'not guilty' verdicts by judges, not juries. Cases
were often discharged by judges, usually when the prosecution decided not to
proceed - because cases were not ready, because victims or other witnesses
withdrew or had been intimidated, or because Crown Prosecution Service
lawyers decided that the evidence was 'unreliable'.

The answer, said judges, was not to make sweeping changes in the law to
reduce suspects' protections, and hence risk wrongful convictions, but to
find ways of getting the CPS and the police to work more closely together
when investigating crimes so that the evidence is more watertight.

------------------------

Whew! *What a ******** to live in. *All that crime and no way to protect
themselves. *I guess they're only engles that the world won't miss, so what
the ****....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think you will find the murder rate in the US is three times higher
than that of the UK.

"PLMerite" wrote in message
news:C%Ctj.26573$we5.9643@trnddc02...

"maximilian smith" wrote in message
...

"PLMerite" wrote in message

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You must
be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think that more guns = less guncrime.

The weeky gun massacres proove the hapless gunloons wrong.

But still they defend their toys...


Stay in England where you're "safe" and STFU.

Not many gunloon massacres here, innit


No, but there's lots of street and residential crime to make up for it.
Maybe a tough like you can handle yourself in a street fight, but how
about your mum?


Of course when the muzzies start running things

Why would 1% of the population take over?


Why is Mohammed the most popular boy's name in Britain?


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1890354.ece


Maybe you should start practicing facing Mecca and putting your ass in the
air five times a day.


Regards, PLMerite


--

"I flew the 109 almost 2,000 times. For me, there's nothing better, and
of
course, there's always this rivalry between the 109 and the Spitfire. And
I
am often asked: which plane I think is better. I tell them I shot down 10
Spitfires, and that's my answer."
- Major Hans-Ekkehard Bob, JG 54, JG 51, JG 3, EJG 2, JV 44



from the disarmed-populace-has-nothing-to-do-with-it dept.

CNET reports that the British Government today attributed the country's 22%
rise in street crime to iPod robberies. This has hit CNET close to home. Guy
Cocker, a CNET (Gamespot) journalist based in London, was mugged last week.
The muggers held 'a semi-automatic weapon to the back of Cocker's head and
told him, "we're taking all your stuff"'. CNET's solution to the problem is
suggestions on how to conceal your iPod from attackers. These include 'The
gaffer tape method,' 'The Coke can method,' and 'The Christopher Walken
method.'

"Larry in AZ" wrote in message
.. .
Low class Nick, the Flitwick Junkman (Euromerc) with greasy fingernails,
obsessed over Americans with this:

"PLMerite" wrote in message

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You
must be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think that more guns = less guncrime.

The weeky gun massacres proove the hapless gunloons wrong.

But still they defend their toys...


Stay in England where you're "safe" and STFU.

Not many gunloon massacres here, innit

Of course when the muzzies start running things

Why would 1% of the population take over?

They have. engles are just too drunk and stupid to notice.

--

You make it sound as if all hope is gone and they've given up on ****ing up
perfectly good food on their own and now rely on foreigners to feed them
curry, big macs, pizza, coke, and that all-time favorite, budweiser.

Buck Mulligan wrote:

In talk.politics.guns Greg Procter wrote:

Buck Mulligan wrote:

In talk.politics.guns "maximilian smith"
wrote:


"Buck Mulligan" wrote in message

I thought the NIU guy had a shotgun.

Correct - plus another gun. How does that relate to my comment? The
point wasn't about what this demented bloke had, but why someone like
him could walk into a gunshop and take one off the shelf and go kill
people with it - with no regulations apart from proving they have a
driver's licence.

http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm

Obviously, you don't know what the **** you're talking about. You must
be from Australia or some other backwater **** hole.

American gunloons think

Nobody gives a **** what you think anyone else thinks.


Those dead students might

Nope.They don't give a **** what you think either.


Did you ask them or is that just you airing your blind prejudices?

"maximilian smith" wrote in message
...

"Larry in AZ" wrote in message

Stay in England where you're "safe" and STFU.

Not many gunloon massacres here, innit


No, but there's lots of street and residential crime to make up for it.
Maybe a tough like you can handle yourself in a street fight, but how
about your mum?

Yurp's crime rates are higher than ours, particularly in the UK, which
has
Yurp's highest violent crime.

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubI...pub_detail.asp

Nice up to date and hopelessly wrong cite...

"2002 could see London's murder rate exceed the Big Apple's"

Larry's a proper dope, innit.


Is this where you pretend you have less street crime than that in the USA?
Who do you think you're talking to here, others as gullible as you?

As long as any person can walk into a gunshop off the street and buy
rifles and ammunition (especially military style weapons) without any
check on their capacity to own one responsibly, and without any course
of training in firearm safety to precede it, then you can expect them
with ominous regularity.

Where have you been? Would you really have wanted the NIU shooter to have
been trained? With respect to the amount of ammo to which he had access, not
to mention the amount expended and the number of targets, his kill rate is
every indication of his inexperience. Thank God! It could have been much
worse. It was also illogical for him to be carrying so many weapons.

Bill DeFranzo wrote:

As long as any person can walk into a gunshop off the street and buy
rifles and ammunition (especially military style weapons) without any
check on their capacity to own one responsibly, and without any course
of training in firearm safety to precede it, then you can expect them
with ominous regularity.

Where have you been? Would you really have wanted the NIU shooter to have
been trained?

Definitely!

With respect to the amount of ammo to which he had access, not
to mention the amount expended and the number of targets, his kill rate is
every indication of his inexperience. Thank God! It could have been much
worse. It was also illogical for him to be carrying so many weapons.

Suicidal gun-loons aren't noted for being logical.

Greg Procter wrote:
Bill DeFranzo wrote:

Where have you been? Would you really have wanted the NIU shooter to have
been trained?

Definitely!

Why?