Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

UK? Australia? Canada? It's all "English people" to us in the USA. Except for those hotties I see from India. That whole Indo-Persian-Anglican mix just seems to produce so much win.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Breotan you really went to sheep as your argument?

OK go into a pub in Britain, start talking gak, and tell me how many of them are running away and not confronting you.

Haha you are such a joker!

I just love how in the previous gun threads there were charts and graphs showing the UK to be more violent than the US, and now you guys are apparently all fleeing from fights. Just dumb.

How about this? UK members can't understand our fascination with guns. US members can't understand why they can't understand our fascination with guns. We're not changing any societal views on this on Dakka, Seriously. All we're doing is rehashing small differences for the umpteenth time. Americans have different views than those in the UK. This isn't shocking, so why are we still debating it?

Good points!

Can we go back to scantily clad women?

and oh... Stay safe from Nemo... looks like you're in the storm path?

Notice how quick your pics were deleted?

And yes indeed Nemo has forced me into another night in East TN as my flight was cancelled. Fun times to be had in an East TN strip club drinking moonshine the other night though. So rough getting into training class the next morning lol.

Yup... just trying to cheer everyone up... it was getting tense a bit.

Ohh... tough life man. Moonshining at a local strip club!!! The aftermath is always worth it!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Breotan you really went to sheep as your argument?

OK go into a pub in Britain, start talking gak, and tell me how many of them are running away and not confronting you.

Haha you are such a joker!

I just love how in the previous gun threads there were charts and graphs showing the UK to be more violent than the US, and now you guys are apparently all fleeing from fights. Just dumb.

How about this? UK members can't understand our fascination with guns. US members can't understand why they can't understand our fascination with guns. We're not changing any societal views on this on Dakka, Seriously. All we're doing is rehashing small differences for the umpteenth time. Americans have different views than those in the UK. This isn't shocking, so why are we still debating it?

Good points!

Can we go back to scantily clad women?

and oh... Stay safe from Nemo... looks like you're in the storm path?

Please... do not refer to this Nor'Easter as a named storm. There is one category of storms that are named, and they are Tropical. IE, Tropical Cyclones, Hurricanes, Typhoons, etc... This is not that, and it pisses me off to no end that the media named this thing.

This has been brought to by your local forum weather man.

Whembly *salutes*

Yes Sir! Forgive my ignorance!

Mattman154 wrote:

Fictional bar buddy brawl! Winner takes all the



I rolled a 7, your turn!

Your buddies are fictional?



Sympz bromide!

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

 Breotan wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Both of you take your tough guy asses over to The Swordfish in Newlyn, UK, where you won't be allowed to carry guns. Try and pick a landing day when the harbor's full of trawlers, then you tell those chaps your wonderful theories and I'll run a book on how many pieces you end up in. In fact, wander into any town in the UK on a Friday night and tell them all they're pussies and see what your brave talk gets you.

I highly recommend it.

If the video is any indication, they'll just drive away while trying to convince a moron emergency operator that the police need to be contacted. And if they all drive away in different directions, there'll be no chance of me catching them all.

That video was shot in Australia. You're only off by half the surface of the earth...

Give it twelve hours, then.

Still, why are all the Aussies on this site silent while the Brits disrespect them like this?

I don't see how any of the Brits are being disrespectful to Aussies.

Whoo I dunno. Not a single stripper was under 150. It was awesome.

On the plus side my hotel has Shiner Bock on tap. You can't even get it in NY for some reason. Best thing to come from Texas EVAR!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

Just, no.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

Really? Never heard of that. I've trained my whole life, and am friends with people have who have actively trained for more then 50 years, and have heard nothing of the sort.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

... (
That's only at township level.

I should know... I turned down my black belt years ago because I didn't want to be "registered". Whatever that means.... not sure if that meant fingerprinting/photos... but, no, I ain't doing that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

Really? Never heard of that. I've trained my whole life, and am friends with people have who have actively trained for more then 50 years, and have heard nothing of the sort.

Again, it depends on local laws... it's not in anywhere in St. Louis anymore (there was one town).

I think there's an old Federal Case that prevents townships from doing that now.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Breotan you really went to sheep as your argument?

OK go into a pub in Britain, start talking gak, and tell me how many of them are running away and not confronting you.

Haha you are such a joker!

I just love how in the previous gun threads there were charts and graphs showing the UK to be more violent than the US, and now you guys are apparently all fleeing from fights. Just dumb.

How about this? UK members can't understand our fascination with guns. US members can't understand why they can't understand our fascination with guns. We're not changing any societal views on this on Dakka, Seriously. All we're doing is rehashing small differences for the umpteenth time. Americans have different views than those in the UK. This isn't shocking, so why are we still debating it?

That's because most UK citizens don't need to defend themselves every time they step out of the front door. Also you cannot compare crime rates of two completely different countries because they will have different ways of reporting and recording crimes as well as a different ratio of crime to population, for example 1 crime per every 10 people. We may have a higher crime to population ratio (one of the worst in Europe apparently) but claiming that there is more crime overall in the UK than the US is just stupid when the US has a population of 313,914,040 whereas the UK has a population of 63,181,775 so by defult the US should have more crimes committed.

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Breotan you really went to sheep as your argument?

OK go into a pub in Britain, start talking gak, and tell me how many of them are running away and not confronting you.

Haha you are such a joker!

I just love how in the previous gun threads there were charts and graphs showing the UK to be more violent than the US, and now you guys are apparently all fleeing from fights. Just dumb.

How about this? UK members can't understand our fascination with guns. US members can't understand why they can't understand our fascination with guns. We're not changing any societal views on this on Dakka, Seriously. All we're doing is rehashing small differences for the umpteenth time. Americans have different views than those in the UK. This isn't shocking, so why are we still debating it?

That's because most UK citizens don't need to defend themselves every time they step out of the front door. Also you cannot compare crime rates of two completely different countries because they will have different ways of reporting and recording crimes as well as a different ratio of crime to population. We may have a higher crime to population ratio (one of the worst in Europe apparently) but claiming that there is more crime overall in the UK than the US is just stupid when the US has a population of 313,914,040 whereas the UK has a population of 63,181,775 so by defult the US should have more crimes committed.

It's not the number of crimes that is a concern it's the crime rates that is and how it compares to other similar nations.

Breotan wrote:UK? Australia? Canada? It's all "English people" to us in the USA. Except for those hotties I see from India. That whole Indo-Persian-Anglican mix just seems to produce so much win.

Sure, if you're into hirsute women, I guess.

Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

This is a fiction that only children believe.

EDIT: and if you ever encounter someone that claims they did have to register themselves as a weapon, then that is a good indicator that if you were to fight them, your only fear should be that you get covered in the complete horsegak they are full of.

 Breotan wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Well, as I said originally... if the victim was permitted to carry a firearm, then in all likelihood the attacker also would have been permitted to carry a firearm.

If the attacker was carrying a firearm, the victim likely would have been shot through his window, and possibly killed.

That did not happen.

Therefore, the victim was made safer than he would have been had the attacker been carrying a firearm.

Your logic is faulty on so many levels.

1. One person being armed has no bearing on the odds of another person also being armed. If I decide to do my (still pending) Wally Walk, exactly how will my possession of a pistol in any way affect the probability that anyone I meet along the way will also be armed?

2. In the USA, road rage incidents rarely seem to erupt into gunfire so I contest there is any inherent validity to your argument. You're making a statement based solely on your own prejudice and not on any evidence or factually based data. Still, given the behavior displayed by victim in the video, your scenario of him (specifically) winding up being shot through the window seems to be the most likely outcome. I base my reasoning on the passive and fearful conduct displayed in the video however, not any demonstrated validity of your arguments.

3. You can't draw a valid conclusion because the faulty arguments you offered previously "did not happen". Also, your conclusion precludes the possibilty of the victim being armed and capable of effectively defending himself.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Yeah remember when all those pussy Brits just threw their hands up during the Battle of Britain? Complete wusses.

Seriously? You had to go all the way back to the Battle of Britain? How long ago was that? While I share Mattman154's view that there is a serious sheep-like passivity being engrained into British society today, surely you can find a more recent example to support your viewpoint?

Wait, so on the one hand Brits are engraining "sheep-like passivity" into their society, and on the other, we're so violent that we should need guns to prevent all the violent crime that goes on*?
wut?




*As has been said in many a recent gun thread.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Breotan wrote:UK? Australia? Canada? It's all "English people" to us in the USA. Except for those hotties I see from India. That whole Indo-Persian-Anglican mix just seems to produce so much win.

Sure, if you're into hirsute women, I guess.

Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

This is a fiction that only children believe.

EDIT: and if you ever encounter someone that claims they did have to register themselves as a weapon, then that is a good indicator that if you were to fight them, your only fear should be that you get covered in the complete horsegak they are full of.

Your right on that mark.

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Breotan wrote:UK? Australia? Canada? It's all "English people" to us in the USA. Except for those hotties I see from India. That whole Indo-Persian-Anglican mix just seems to produce so much win.

Sure, if you're into hirsute women, I guess.

Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

This is a fiction that only children believe.

EDIT: and if you ever encounter someone that claims they did have to register themselves as a weapon, then that is a good indicator that if you were to fight them, your only fear should be that you get covered in the complete horsegak they are full of.

Your right on that mark.

I think it mostly came from those “registration cards” they’d gotten from their instructors. These instructors, would charged them a hefty fee to be registered. Much ado about nuthing.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Breotan you really went to sheep as your argument?

OK go into a pub in Britain, start talking gak, and tell me how many of them are running away and not confronting you.

Haha you are such a joker!

I just love how in the previous gun threads there were charts and graphs showing the UK to be more violent than the US, and now you guys are apparently all fleeing from fights. Just dumb.

How about this? UK members can't understand our fascination with guns. US members can't understand why they can't understand our fascination with guns. We're not changing any societal views on this on Dakka, Seriously. All we're doing is rehashing small differences for the umpteenth time. Americans have different views than those in the UK. This isn't shocking, so why are we still debating it?

That's because most UK citizens don't need to defend themselves every time they step out of the front door. Also you cannot compare crime rates of two completely different countries because they will have different ways of reporting and recording crimes as well as a different ratio of crime to population. We may have a higher crime to population ratio (one of the worst in Europe apparently) but claiming that there is more crime overall in the UK than the US is just stupid when the US has a population of 313,914,040 whereas the UK has a population of 63,181,775 so by defult the US should have more crimes committed.

It's not the number of crimes that is a concern it's the crime rates that is and how it compares to other similar nations.

But before you can copare the rates of violent crimes between countries you need to find out what counts as a violent crime in both countries as well as how effective the doucmentation of these crimes are. Simply comparing statistics without looking at the differences in how they were collected is silly and does not work.

I agree.

 Breotan wrote:
Your logic is faulty on so many levels.

Not really, however, your logic is entirely partisan and flawed.

 Breotan wrote:

1. One person being armed has no bearing on the odds of another person also being armed. If I decide to do my (still pending) Wally Walk, exactly how will my possession of a pistol in any way affect the probability that anyone I meet along the way will also be armed?

Root cause analysis suggest that if you are armed with a gun, probability supports you existing in a gun friendly society, this dramatically affects the odds of encountering another person armed with a gun. In the OP video, the chances of the attacking driver being armed, given a gun friendly society, would be likely.

 Breotan wrote:

2. In the USA, road rage incidents rarely seem to erupt into gunfire so I contest there is any inherent validity to your argument. You're making a statement based solely on your own prejudice and not on any evidence or factually based data. Still, given the behavior displayed by victim in the video, your scenario of him (specifically) winding up being shot through the window seems to be the most likely outcome. I base my reasoning on the passive and fearful conduct displayed in the video however, not any demonstrated validity of your arguments.

Rarely vs any inherent validity, you see the obvious flaw in this I hope? Also your wonderful psychoanalysis of the probability of the victim being shot is amazing, especially as you base the outcome of being shot as a result of showing fear and being passive, when you have absolutely no evidence to suggest that link. It can be argued that the victim would be shot by the attacker as the attacker... attacks... So the attacker uses the first weapon he can, his truck, when instead, if presented with a gun, it would be a more logical choice to use as a weapon than a vehicle, thus the first action of the attacker isn't to ram, but to shoot and so the victim dies not through 'cowardice' but simply because he was attacked...

I want to do you harm - I have a gun or a truck... I will use the truck as transport and the gun to cause harm... because that's what both are principally designed to do. Logical progression is about looking at the most likely outcomes, it is most likely that people will use tools for their intended purposes.

 Breotan wrote:

3. You can't draw a valid conclusion because the faulty arguments you offered previously "did not happen". Also, your conclusion precludes the possibilty of the victim being armed and capable of effectively defending himself.

And you use the very same daydreamy hypothesis to come up with the cowardice argument you presented above, so you're guilty of conjuring up the same bs. There were a billion outcomes to the events in the video, adding firearms to the same situation adds another multitude of potential outcomes but most certainly ups the potential for one to many fatalities, whether carried by the victim, the aggressor or likely both.

your reasoning needs some work...

I'm sure if the victim had a gun, it would look just like this:



After all, I've played enough Call of Duty to know how to defend myself. I'm sure that even if my attacker got the first shot in, I'd get him back on the respawn.

 Sturmtruppen wrote:
I'm sure if the victim had a gun, it would look just like this:



After all, I've played enough Call of Duty to know how to defend myself. I'm sure that even if my attacker got the first shot in, I'd get him back on the respawn.

Totally shopped. I can tell cause pixels.

Only in America is having a gun a right but access to medical treatment with no large bills (like NHS) is a privilage. What a strange country. At least that will be a lot of money for the hospitals fixing up all those gunshot wounds.

 MetalOxide wrote:
Only in America is having a gun a right but access to medical treatment with no large bills (like NHS) is a privilage. What a strange country. At least that will be a lot of money for the hospitals fixing up all those gunshot wounds.

You have a warp'ed view of "Murica.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Breotan wrote:UK? Australia? Canada? It's all "English people" to us in the USA. Except for those hotties I see from India. That whole Indo-Persian-Anglican mix just seems to produce so much win.

Sure, if you're into hirsute women, I guess.

Grey Templar wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

djones520 wrote:You can stick to your fists in a life or death situation. While I've been extensively trained in how to kill people with my bare hands, I'd still prefer to use a gun to defend my life if it's necessary.

Uh-huh. Have you registered your bare hands as lethal weapons, too?

No laws required for that yet. Maybe one day I will have to. But since more people are beaten to death every year then killed with semi-automatic assault weapon style rifles, maybe they should be?

Actually, I believe that if you hold certain levels in certain martial arts your very body becomes legally defined as a deadly weapon. And if you attack someone it will count in a court of law as Assault with a deadly weapon.

This is a fiction that only children believe.

EDIT: and if you ever encounter someone that claims they did have to register themselves as a weapon, then that is a good indicator that if you were to fight them, your only fear should be that you get covered in the complete horsegak they are full of.

Fair enough, it was just something I'd heard.

 whembly wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
Only in America is having a gun a right but access to medical treatment with no large bills (like NHS) is a privilage. What a strange country. At least that will be a lot of money for the hospitals fixing up all those gunshot wounds.

You have a warp'ed view of "Murica.

I think he's watched Robocop one to many times. Seems to think America is nothing but some wild west urban gang war.

Its a misconception we try to cultivate. Keeps the wierdos away

 Grey Templar wrote:
Its a misconception we try to cultivate. Keeps the wierdos away

You know... you have a great point

 djones520 wrote:
Seems to think America is nothing but some wild west urban gang war.

Hate to break it to you but no one actually thinks this. Shocking i know but no one really thinks that there's Predator 2 style street shoot outs going on in the streets of America.

 Snrub wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Seems to think America is nothing but some wild west urban gang war.

Hate to break it to you but no one actually thinks this. Shocking i know but no one really thinks that there's Predator 2 style street shoot outs going on in the streets of America.

Have you read his posts?

I hope people don't think that, because that was a god awful movie.

 djones520 wrote:

 Snrub wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Seems to think America is nothing but some wild west urban gang war.

Hate to break it to you but no one actually thinks this. Shocking i know but no one really thinks that there's Predator 2 style street shoot outs going on in the streets of America.

Have you read his posts?

I hope people don't think that, because that was a god awful movie.

While Danny Glover is CLEARLY no Arnold, Predator 2 did have Gary Busey. When I want my aliens dead while on cocaine, I look to only one source.

What was so wrong about his post? (Assuming you were refering to Metal Oxides post and not Whembly.)

 Snrub wrote:
What was so wrong about his post? (Assuming you were refering to Metal Oxides post and not Whembly.)

You mean this?

 MetalOxide wrote:
Only in America is having a gun a right but access to medical treatment with no large bills (like NHS) is a privilage. What a strange country. At least that will be a lot of money for the hospitals fixing up all those gunshot wounds.

Well... he sorta does have a point.

We are a strange country...
....
....
....
....
....
From a non-American view that is.

At least we drive on the right side of the road. (What side do Aussie drive on?)

EDIT: Does anyone know the source why the Brits (and some colonies) drive on the left side of the road? It was due to horses/donkeys being trained to walk on the left side.