I thought you'd all love to see this little gem of stupidity. It doesn't give enough detail to tell if the guy qualifies for a Darwin Award , but I'll bet he sings high soprano now :)
Printable View
I thought you'd all love to see this little gem of stupidity. It doesn't give enough detail to tell if the guy qualifies for a Darwin Award , but I'll bet he sings high soprano now :)
No , not Guns , this ;
"Walker told officers he was so drunk he had no idea how he managed to shoot himself and why he went to fetch the weapon. "
Guns don't Kill... Dumb *** people kill....
Crazy Brits....
http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/o...ixopinion.html
Obviously the dumbness isn't just this one person...
I should add, for clarification, that I'm not an anti-gun nut. America'a collective love affair with its firearms is too deeply rooted to disappear in a hurry.
We Brits have little need of guns for the most part, none of our wildlife is big enough to regard us as a tasty snack (we killed all the wolves and bears centuries ago).
This case is just another one of alcohol lowering the IQ, which was probably smaller than his shoe size to begin with :)
:thumbs:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit
I've always given credit to the UK for not being big on guns . :thumbs2:
We in Canada are big on guns ... We just are not big on shooting each other...
I dig guns... sometimes they're just cool. Like those big guns on a battleship. I don't really like the extremists, though (extreme gun nut or anti-gun) Sometimes they're just amazing pieces of machinery and sometimes useful tools, which are too often not handled properly
See , thats where that guy messed up , if he had got on a BattleShipQuote:
Originally Posted by thefork8
stood in front of a gun and pulled the trigger thier wouldn't be much mess (nothing a water hose wouldn't take care of :D ) or any jail time or paying a lawyer ;)
He was jailed for 5 years? What for, gross stupidity?
I don't get it....why jail him at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by gazzak
Just let him live with the pain, he's already removed himself from the gene pool.
So I take it your government is totally willing and able to protect you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit
Wait a minute, that's right. UK basically outlawed self-defence.
Not attempting to turn this political, but I just don't understand the "collective disdain" for firearms that the Brits have. And I categorically do not trust law enforcement or government to defend my life or property if need be.
It's quite simple, guns are noisy and expensive and we prefer quiet.
I am a good shot... Guns are good for hunting and target shooting. Defending yourself against someone who has a gun is difficult, even if you have one yourself.
If guns are banned except for specific purposes, then it stands to reason the guy with the gun in a street is a baddie (unless he is wearing kevlar and a police uniform).
In places where guns are held by all, how do you tell which one is the bad guy? By his accent? his dress?
Actually I think its beer thats dangerous.
Problem is, it's just as hard to find to GOOD guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by NooNoo
I dunno about the UK, but in the States, there's basically a judicial ruling stating that police forces have no legal obligation to protect individual citizens. Original ruling was in Washington DC (Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C.App. 1981) ; 24 other states have pursued the same course.
And what's worse, records show that law enforcement is not any more effective at positively ID'ing suspects, and frequently are careless with their OWN firearms.
So the question then goes back to my point: Who's responsible for my safety/security? Me, or "the man"?