Bush

Originally posted by kingofthe303
Given the US voting fiasco, i'm not sure whether you voted for him or not is of any consequence.😕

the only real problem was florida, and they only got screw up because things were drawing to a head and the parties were paniking so they threw wrenches in the works to buy themselves time.

Originally posted by fearlessleader
gun regulations, sure, but banning guns, or making them inacsesable to common citizens just garentees that only pepole who don't care about the law to begin with will be able to get them. even if a violent criminal could not get a gun, he would still be able to kill pepole with a knife, but pedestyans can't defend themselves with knives, they dont know how.

People who have guns are vastly more likely to get killed by them, it's a fact. Domestic violence in a house with a gun, is something like 8 times more likely to result in murder, because it removes the visceral edge in the human psyche, and makes them more likely to resort to that final method of silencing an antagonist. And saying pedestrians can't defend themselves with a knife is ridiculous, do you think criminals get knife attack lessons? I don't think people should be carrying weapons in the street at all never mind arguing about the grade of offensiveness. If someone comes at you wanting to rob you and they have a gun, give them what they want and leave it, if you have a gun as well, someone will get shot.
If you add together the populations of Britain, Australia, Japan, Norway, Sweden, New Zealand and Portugal, you get somewhere near the population of the US. These are all countries with strict gun control laws. The total of gun related deaths in these countries is less than 200 a year. In America it's over 10,000. Now say guns are a good thing. I'm not saying that a ban on guns in America would work or even be practical (a sense of stable doors and horses), maybe the genie is out of the box too far to turn back but your particular arguments are not good ones. The ability to procure guns easily would not be a healthy thing to introduce into any nation. And your comments about the high rise in crime in the UK is also incorrect. There has been a 4% drop in violent crime over the last 2 years. Your comments seem to me to be ill-advised and insensitive.
I'm sorry but I had to get that off my chest.

Originally posted by fearlessleader
gun regulations, sure, but banning guns, or making them inacsesable to common citizens just garentees that only pepole who don't care about the law to begin with will be able to get them. even if a violent criminal could not get a g ...[text shortened]... destyans can't defend themselves with knives, they dont know how.

Wow! Please don't believe everything the gun lobby tells you. Even in the UK, which was pretty dire in 2001 (I can't find more recent statistics, but I believe crime rates have dropped since then), we were 3.4 times less likely to be murdered and 1.9 times less likely to be raped than US citizens. (2001 figures from http://www.interpol.int)

ok.
as stated elsewhere, i dont really have a fu(king clue.
the moral logistics of domestic volence is a compleatly diffrent matter, which i wont go into.

Getting back to the original question, can confirm the W. stands for Walker, though it takes some searching to find it on the White House web site...🙄

Originally posted by fearlessleader
gun regulations, sure, but banning guns, or making them inacsesable to common citizens just garentees that only pepole who don't care about the law to begin with will be able to get them. even if a violent criminal could not get a gun, he would still be able to kill pepole with a knife, but pedestyans can't defend themselves with knives, they dont know how.

But it would prevent a lot of shootingaccidents from which a lot of people and especially children are victims.

As the criminal knows a lot of people are having guns ... they kill first before grabbing the money. If your victim doesn't have a gun... there is no "need" to kill him/her. Having a gun does not work as a safety measure against crime and violence. My opinion is that it will raise the crime rate and the intensity of violence because criminals expect you to have a gun yourself and they need more violence to get what they want.

Nicolai

Alley
How can you compare Bush with Winnie the Poo ? Have you ever read the Toa of Poo ? He was no Owl I know but somehow be it the powers of balance in the universe, he always got his honey no matter what and he repected nature. Poo is a hero ! Bush is not !

Originally posted by sophie79
Alley
How can you compare Bush with Winnie the Poo ? Have you ever read the Toa of Poo ? He was no Owl I know but somehow be it the powers of balance in the universe, he always got his honey no matter what and he repected nature. Poo is a hero ! Bush is not !

what the hell??

Lighten up it's the New Year. Wishing you all a very Happy New Year!

Here's a question for you . What is hell?

Originally posted by sophie79
Lighten up it's the New Year. Wishing you all a very Happy New Year!

Here's a question for you . What is hell?

acording to Dante, it's a really big crater that goes all the way to the center of the earth.

Originally posted by mmanuel
substitute l for n and then you're correct!

apologies to any patriotic americans, but I don't like the guy!

I agree, George Bush is dumb.

If you would make all guns illegal for everyone (besides for police etc) then:

- 1) Crime will rise on short term
+ 2) Crime will go down on long term
+ 3) Less people will die by accident
+ 4) Less people will be killed
- 5) On short term it would not be good for the retail or the governement