8 year old shoots himself with UZI

So if they were banned over there, then how did the IRA get them? Also, it wasn't all guns either. There were a lot of bombs and bombs can be easily made from everyday substances.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But even if that's true, that doesn't answer where the IRA gets their guns if the UK bans guns. So, let's say that America sends the IRA 880 trillion dollars a month, the UK still has a ban on guns, so ....where does the IRA get their guns? ..even with 880 trillion dollars?

Surely you're not suggesting that a ban on guns doesn't work? No, surely you're not saying that!

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What fairy tale world? You don't know my beliefs. My complaint was with your argument style. You obviously beleive that their should be laws. You argue for your beliefs. It's silly to respond the way you did to me.

Those were rhetorical questions and beside the point in context unless I was speaking to an anarchist. If you are an anarchist, then your response makes some sense. In that case you do not believe in laws that reflect your morals. Let me know if I have misunderstood you Max. Are you an anarchist?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

88 trillion dollars. You're such a fucking tit.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The IRA smuggled their guns in using US cash. The IRA, along with other on both sides of the sectarian divide, was an outlawed organisation but had the US not bankrolled them for decades they certainly wouldn't have been able to buy their smuggled guns.

So what eventually did for the men of violence (on both sides of said sectarian divide)? Did their guns get them what they wanted?

The people of Ireland got sick of the violence. Negotiations between all parties ended the violence and now everyone sits laughing together in the Stormont. But thanks US for making that take a hell of a lot longer than it should have thanks to their belief that guns solve everything.

And Mickmeister. No armoured vehicles on the streets of belfast anymore so you better update your history.

 

But I thought you said the UK had banned guns in the nation? Surely the IRA and the criminals in the UK are obeying the law, aren't they? If not, perhaps y'all should create another law, huh?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

See? Laws are for the people who obey the laws ...they don't even apply to criminals and terrorists and such nasty people.

So why should another law be passed in the USA to ban guns? Is it something that ...if there are enough laws passed against gun ownership that the criminals will finally decided to obey?

Is that "US" to mean the federal government, or is it just a select few US citizens sending money to the IRA? If you think it's the US government, please provide some evidence for it.

Baron Max

 

Those who break the law will be met by the law won't they? Would flooding a country with guns make guns more or less accessible to criminals and 8 year olds?

I may be at risk from being shot by a 'criminal'. In the UK I think it is a relatively minor risk. I wouldn't want to increase my risk of being shot by my neighbour because of an overhanging tree branch or some such. Or my own son who managed to get his hands on his friend's dad's gun and thought he'd 'play' with it.

To each his own I guess, eh Max?

 

Irrelevent.

 

Only if the law/police are strong enough to enforce those laws.

I think it wouldn't make much difference, actually. It seems, and your IRA is proof, that gun bans don't stop criminals from getting guns if they want them.

To each his own??? How can you say that when you're actually talking about forcing others to do what you want??? You're being terribly tolerant in your personal IN-tolerance.

Baron Max

 

No, it's not. You accused the US, meaning the government, of supplying money and arms to the IRA. Now you're saying "irrelevant"?????

Baron Max

 

It wasn't the US government, although I do believe there was the usual scandals previously posted about Clinton and even Kerry being involved in some of their funding either going to or coming from the IRA.

So it's not like the UK blamed the whole US for funding the IRA. It's also possible that some of the gun manufacturing plants that the UK uses are also located in Ireland, putting the guns into the hands of the locals. It was also known that the IRA use to hire out their men to train mecenaries elsewhere in the world, especially if it happened to be somewhere the UK happened to be involved in.

I'm quite glad that a lot of headway has been made in Ireland since back then though, it was a shame for decades to pass and generations of haters to be born with no clue as to what the hatred stemmed from.

 

yea and?

Did I say it would? But pray tell do the IRA rule the world now?

I was? Where? How can I force you to do something you don't want Baron?

 

Why yes. Yes I am.

The money came from the US and the government didn't seem to want to stop that happening because I'm sure the US government could do that couldn't it? Stop money from it's own citizens fuelling illegal arms 'exports' to another country? You know risking the stability of said country.....an all.

 

Accusations of illegal activity usually requires some form of proof or valid evidence. Otherwise it's nothing but slanderous drivel.

Funny thing, that. We American value our freedoms ...and that includes sending some of our money to "Joe Irishman". The federal government has no control over that UNLESS "Joe Irishman" is a known terrorist or has known terrorist connections.

In Texas right now, the feds are trying to prove in court that a bunch of Muslims in north Texas sent money to known terrorists in the Middle East. It's a major court trial, and I suspect that the feds are NOT going to be able to prove their cases sufficiently to get a conviction. And yet, it's almost a foregone conclusion that they were, in fact, sending money to the militant Palestinians ...it's like "everyone" knows it, but they can't actually prove it.

Have you never heard of "freedom FROM government"? Do you actually want and like your own government to tell you where and who you can send money to? Surely you don't want that. Or maybe soon they'll be telling who you can fuck on Friday nights? Ooh, wouldn't that be nice of the govs?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Baron Max

 

One accidental death of a privileged child by an uzi is not a tragedy, just an error. A tragedy is the millions of children who die, often due to capitalist exploitation, war, and trade sanctions, whose deaths don't each get their own media blitz.

 

And just as often it's not due to capitalist exploitation, war and trade sanctions. So why list only those? Or are you attempting to push your own bias onto those tragedies?

Baron Max

 

No, they were simply the first examples that sprung to mind. I am fully alive to the fact that the list of reasons is much, much longer.

 

yes, he would be.
If my child was learning to drive with an instructor and crashed, should I demand that cars be outlawed?

 

Are you really Baron ? Don't you see a difference between guns and cars ?
Guns are intended to kill, cars are not.

 

I'm jumping in here kind of late, but what's the problem exactly? The kid didn't die as a result of lax gun laws, he died because he was surrounded by idiots.

 

With guns.