the antithesis phht, opera was the original rock’n’roll
Mater’s Mischief #2: Bang!
- Open Thread – Weekend 21 April 2024
- Open Thread – Thurs 18 April 2024
- Open Thread – Mon 15 April 2024
- Projects impending
- Open Thread – Weekend 13 April 2024
Rock ‘n’ Roll … Uggy and QOTSA on Jools 🙂
Cho Cho San excellent behaviour
you didn’t do opera Yes, I did not “do Oprah”, being as it is, the antithesis of Rock ‘n’ Roll.…
stan freberg?
Look, I think the dude has a good point about US military removing armed loons (Nazis& Fascists) from Europe. But look, there is something askew about a 17 year old kid allowed to legally carry a rifle along a suburban street in what is supposed to be a peaceful country.
The German is confused because he isn’t wearing a brown shirt.
Yes, they’re just peaceful riots going on all over the US for the last however many years.
The nauseating sanctimony from the German, given German recent history….I can’t help laughing. There’s a word for it….chutzpah.
Yes it is peaceful other than the “mostly peaceful but firey” upper West Coast and a couple of parts of the mid West. Don’t assume America is Seattle, Portland and Minneapolis.
Or New York, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Washington, California, Minnesota and wherever else that I’ve missed.
If it was a peaceful country, him carrying the gun wouldn’t have become an issue.
Fifty years ago there was nothing unusual in schoolboys carrying rifles to and from school for cadets.
Here.
JC…
The question that you should be asking is, “Why shouldn’t he?”
Despite the media focus on scary-guns that look like something that the military use, but don’t actually work that way, that classification of firearm are involved in less than 3% of homicides in the US. There is no good reason to believe that making them illegal would result in fewer homicides.
1. Criminals don’t obey laws.
2. Criminals have a vast array of choices when it comes to effective weaponry.
Secondly, you can’t point to a single nation or jurisdiction that has reduced homicide by controlling guns. America is – or was until recently – right around the world average for homicide. Gun-controls f the kind that you appear to want are universal in the more-than 100 nations that have higher homicide rates than the US.
Thirdly…. Would you really rather see a 17yo who has committed no crime, dead on the street , so that his criminal attackers can have a safe working environment? Surely you are better than that?
NB. Fake comparisons and cherry-picking that data will win no arguments. Nations like Australia and England had low homicide rates before we had gun control. Violent crime rates within the US are enormously variable, and the violent areas are culturally and economically “third world”. An ethnic-gang member in a poor inner-urban suburb is culturally indistinguishable from any other member of similar criminal organisations around the world.
Good luck with changing that!
There is more askew about focusing on the tools used than the crimes committed, than there is about a young man surviving an attempt to murder him.
America and the world needs more Kyle Rittenhouses.
PeterW
Stop insinuating I want to ban long barrel guns or any guns for that matter.
The point I raised is should a 17 year old kid be legally allowed to walk around with a gun on a suburban street?
A suburban street that is shared by all the community.
Catallaxy needs him for a few hours of “work”.
“JCsays:
November 26, 2021 at 7:58 am
Cassie of Sydney says:
November 26, 2021 at 7:49 am
America and the world needs more Kyle Rittenhouses.
Catallaxy needs him for a few hours of “work”.”
LOL…..yes indeed!
Stupid Krauts.
They’ve been a country for only 150 years and managed to start both world wars.
Kyle is not only toting a rifle – but also a first aid kit and he already has gloves on for quick reaction to a first aid situation.
On ya kid.
And the first aid kit and gloves not to be used for the head and stomach shots
as that would be a little redundant, but to render assistance for any blown away upper arm shot. 🙂
Don’t forget the wars of Austrian Succession, the Seven Years War and a lot of the Napoleonic conflicts, wars of national unification…oh and Marx & Engels…and… moustache man.
Guns are inanimate objects. They have NO agency. Years s ago, I ran a telling experiment. I placed a “self-loading rifle’, an empty magazine and a box of live ammunition in a locked room. A week later, I checked in and the “self-loading rifle” hadn’t.
Once you grasp the significance of that, it becomes permanently obvious that “gun control” is really about PEOPLE CONTROL.
The question of “allowing” goes right to the core of the problem besetting the planet.
Allegedly, in some countries, (but it is increasingly a LIE), there is the fundamental precept of the “presumption of innocence”.
Daily, we are being assaulted by degenerate legalists ramming through laws and regulations that PERMANENTLY reverse the onus of proof. When was the last time ANYONE saw a “bad law” completely repealed and scrubbed from the books?
This is in line with the total inversion of the alleged system in which the “citizens” are the ultimate masters.
EVERY aspect of the response to Kung Flu clearly shows this accelerating trend.
Citizen or slave? Your call, but it only applies to YOU.
Being assaulted and robbed in your own quiet suburban street also tends to affect one’s perspective on such matters. If you tolerate parasites, you will get MORE parasites, whether they wear stolen runners or Manolos.
And, while we are on the subject of “living in interesting times”:
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n23/david-wallace-wells/ten-million-a-year
“Or New York, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Washington, California, Minnesota and wherever else that I’ve missed.”
And, oddly enough, in Florida – where one sheriff said along the lines of “I recommend you don’t do that here. My citizens have guns, they like their guns and I encourage them to have guns. And if someone comes into your house or tries to burn it down, I recommend those citizens blow those people back out the door with those guns.” – had virtually zero riots to contend with.
It’s also interesting that the media is very silent on the black man who, on the same day as the Rittenhouse verdict, was acquitted on self-defense grounds for killing four police officers who violently entered his house (with a search warrant). Because “self defense”. No mention of THAT being “white supremacy” or a “precedent” is there?
Not Reason magazine. It wasn’t his house. It was his fathers house. The cop shot his girlfriend and he appears to have very decent case of self defence . I link to it on the other page. Just because the cops had a warrant doesn’t mean they can kill people and act unlawfully.
JC…
It doesn’t matter which aspect of gun-control you try to cherry-pick, you still have to provide a justification, and you haven’t.
You still haven’t provided a rational argument as to why members of the community should not be able to defend themselves AND the rest of their community, from violent criminals.
If the Police and authorities had been doing their job, KR wouldn’t have needed to be there. That fact should be of greater concern to you. Why isn’t it?
The simplest question to ask regarding KR carrying a rifle is, “What would stopping him achieve?”
More riots.
More stuff burnt.
More decent people dead.
Why would you want that?
What, EXACTLY does “public space” mean?
Does it mean that a 17YO WHO HAS COMMITTED NO CRIME should not be able to go there without grave risk of death or serious injury?
Good laws punish the criminals, not the innocent.
Bruce, I read down to this statement and decided to ditch reading anymore.
According to new research, half of these deaths, concentrated in the developing world, are the result of consumption and fossil-fuel burning in the world’s richest countries.l
(There was no reference for that statement).
Air pollution in the developing world – see India as an example – is primarily the result of no access to electricity. Without electricity, whether generated by burning coal or from hydro power, forces the people to burn cow dung for fuel, primarily for cooking.
The poisonous fumes that are inhaled – cooking is undertaken inside their homes – is disastrous for health.
Access to cheap, affordable electricity in the third world would do more to improve the lives of the people there than blaming the west for their plight. The fact is India and other developing nations need many more Adani’s and lots more clean Australian coal and fewer shrill western wailers.
“The cop shot his girlfriend and he appears to have very decent case of self defence”
I agree, and so did the jury.
As I mentioned, ON THE SAME DAY as Rittenhouse was acquitted, so was this guy.
One white, killing white people; one black killing white people.
White one risks creating a riot and much media coverage and associated “racism” outrage.
Black one very little media coverage and no outrage.
And while the black guy had not much evidence, the white guy had video on the ground and from an FBI drone showing he was trying to run away from a guy who had twice threatened to kill him, and after he shot that guy when he was trying to take his weapon from him, was running towards police in order to tell them what had happened (while yelling “friendly”), when he got jumped and assaulted with a skateboard.
Notice too, many were saying KR was ‘acting’ when he was crying on the stand, but it looks exactly the same as his reaction when the jury verdict was read – both obviously very stressful events.
Calli,
There was a time when the sporting goods shops where I grew up had their guns on display up on the wall on racks. Dad his guns under the bed and we knew not to touch them.
Some years ago I was listening to the ABC – something I used to do – and a lady called the station – there was a discussion about a house fire, which had started with a candle.
She said that she had 5(?) siblings and their house had an open fire. The upshot was that all the kids knew to stay away from the fire. (Easy, really. Direct instruction from parents who, the kids know, are the ones who are in charge).
“there is something askew about a 17 year old kid allowed to legally carry a rifle”
Would there be the same outrage if he was carrying a bow and arrow?
America is not a peaceful country, if you go to the wrong neighbourhood or streets in their cities, you can have very serious problems. The majority of America appears peaceful, but that’s at the surface, if anything occurs it can change dramatically and very quickly.
Most Americans I know have reserves of various things (food, ammo, energy), they are prepared because they understand their country and its culture. It is what it is and it’s only foreigners like us, who mostly don’t understand their culture. It may appear docile, but it is also one step away from being a frontier once again where might rules.
their entertainment culture has a lot to do with their violence or readiness for violence. Anyone ever watched a Marvel movie? John Wick? yes it’s entertainment and I love stuff blowing up and all the wild driving and action, but I understand that’s entertainement. Some people seem to see parallels in real life to be adopted from dress up and make believe entertainment.
Alec Baldwin even, for all his bluster about guns and “those” people, had no issue waving a gun around. He did not know better as he denigrated anyone who had a gun (or two). Not knowing how to safely handle or check a weapon, he fatally shot someone .. he didn’t mean to of course, but that’s the reason behind many fatal shootings, a mistake, usually by a novice.
If you live in a country with a gun culture, that came from the very beginning of the republic, best you aquaint yourself with guns. I’ve been to many gun ranges in the USA and nearly always see parents teaching young children the correct way to handle firearms.
And it seems like all those gun-free Democrat run cities, like Chicago, are the worst for violent crime and especially gun related deaths.
“Alec Baldwin even, for all his bluster about guns and “those” people, had no issue waving a gun around. He did not know better as he denigrated anyone who had a gun (or two). Not knowing how to safely handle or check a weapon, he fatally shot someone .. he didn’t mean to of course,…”
Baldwin had previously been trained on firearm safety, so he did know.
Also, it was NOT in the script for him to fire a weapon in that scene.
And lastly, it is/was a single action revolver, which means to fire it, you need to cock the hammer first, and then pull the trigger.
In short, he didn’t check the weapon when it was handed to him, he wasn’t supposed to fire it, but anyway cocked the hammer, pointed it at someone and pulled the trigger. At best, that is reckless, at worst intentional homocide.
Baldwin has been a strident voice demanding that guns be banned, yet he and other of his ilk, continue to make movies involving gun violence. This is akin to climate worriers demanding everyone move to renewables etc, without making any lifestyle adjustments themselves.
It’s always do as I say, not as I do.
Bit of a contradiction here.
America is an enormously diverse country, culturally , economically…. and with respect to crime rates.
Reality, as criminologists have recognised for decades, is that the dangerous areas look, feel and have the same attitudes as violent third-world cultures around the world. It is perfectly true that if you go to the WRONG PLACES and associate with the WRONG PEOPLE , then you are at far higher risk.
It has nothing to do with legal firearms ownership. Of the major demographics, firearms ownership is highest amongst the “white, middle-class, rural” category, yet they have amongst the lowest rates of firearms crime. Ignore Hollywood. American farmers and ranchers are no more likely to kill you than their Australian or European equivalents.
“Black, inner-urban, poor” as a group own very few firearms legally (yes, Dorothy, America DOES have restrictions on firearms ownership and use, roughly 20,000 seperate regulations) and a disproportionately high level of violence.
Japanese-Americans, with good access to firearms, have a lower violent crime rate than Japanese nationals who have very limited access. It’s about the culture, not the guns.
You can effectively predict the violent crime rate in any US community, by analysing the makeup with reference to just three groups. African-American, Latino and “Southern White Trash”. (Yep, that’s a recognised group, too.)
Blunt message?
Stay out of areas where ethnic gangs are fighting turf-wars over drug territory. Stay away from dysfunctional family gatherings.
These two things, alone, will reduce your risk of being a victim, by 80-90%.
Common-sense.
You can predict
I think Australians just don’t understand the attitude to guns in the US.
People here are informed by our cultural attitude and depictions on American movies where guns are only used by bad guys to hurt or kill innocent people, or by officially sanctioned personnel such as police. We see again and again bad guys gunning down defenceless people, shooting someone for a pair of shoes, or to make sure they cannot be identified, spraying a crowd to get after one person, and so on (all scenes that deliberately tap into your own fear of vulnerability and powerlessness). These same bad people are drug dealers, rapists, thugs, or psychopaths.
And beyond reason – the last chance of the desperate man.
To us guns are death and destruction. A vicious totem. Each possessed by an evil presence to which any person who picks it up is a unwitting tool for its demonic ends.
But in America these movies secondary. Skewed abstractions from a broader reality. In America guns are just…guns. They can be simple, single-purpose item, they can be objet d’art, they can be the source of hours of amicable debate among connoisseurs, they can be sport, they can be a way to connect with and keep alive a past of greater freedom and independence than now (no one hunts deer because they are hungry). Perhaps it is due to this last that the instinct to freedoms bubble closer to the surface, quicker to erupt, in Americans than other nations where it is buried under the instinct to ‘not get into any trouble’.
In America a gun is but a tool. It can be misused to do bad things, sure. But I think they see it qualitatively as not dissimilar to a knife, or even a car. You learn to be careful. You keep them away from children. You don’t walk around swinging a knife at someone, nor pointing a gun. You don’t walk among people holding the blade forward, nor with your finger on the trigger. As guns are more powerful there is more discipline. You check a weapon before you give it to someone. Hell, you check it before you give it to yourself – when you pick it up you check first.
Young Kyle carried a gun for protection. He was there to help the injured and undo some of the damage – how is that for impressive: He was prepared to help the very people who were doing the damage he was trying to clean up! When he was first attacked he did not resort to his weapon in a panic. He had been taught not to. He had been ingrained with the idea that you do not point your gun at people. Instead he ran to escape the situation because as he saw it his choices were to stick around in an escalating situation or leave. It was not until he was immobile on the ground and otherwise helpless against those intent on harming him that he fired. Not dozens of rounds. Not spraying. Controlled shots. He then went looking for the police to turn himself in because he knew anytime a person is shot (or stabbed, or run down) there needs to be an investigation to see if there was a crime.
On that night people were safer from Kyle Rittenhouse walking around with an AR-16 than they were of a single one of his attackers with a knife. Even a skateboard.
For our German friend, the sight of a gun was almost the equivalent of it being used. The image cast its spell over him.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I do not own a gun, do not shoot them at the firing range, and in fact have absolutely no desire to do so now. My instinct is that I would become a little too casual and careless and blow my foot off. Or someone else’s. But that is me, not guns.
@Bar Beach Swimmer:
I linked to that article without comment, apart from the “interesting times” reference, because it seemed to be “different, if not entirely “factual”. The POLITICS of health and environment have LONG been captured by some “interesting” people.
This is evident in the rapid pivoting from one “crisis” to another.
“Crisis management”? More like; “Management BY crisis”, as per Rahm Emanuel and sundry Alinskyites.
ALWAYS: “A solution in search of a problem”. ALWAYS!
As for talking about “gun culture”…
Does anyone here really think that the following all have the same attitude toward firearms?
A doctor who hunts birds with a shotgun.
A military veteran .
A law-enforcement officer.
A nurse who “carries” because she works shifts and a co-worker was raped in the hospital car park.
A drug-dealer who does business with people who routinely want more than they are willing to pay for.
A pimp who relies on fear to keep his prostitutes in line.
Really?
“American Gun Culture” has been used as a bogey to frighten the children since the 70s. There is no such thing as a single, discrete entity.
WaPo two days ago:
“Waukesha police identify victims killed after SUV drove through parade…”
“You check a weapon before you give it to someone. Hell, you check it before you give it to yourself – when you pick it up you check first.”
First rule: always assume a gun is loaded.
Second rule: only ever point a firearm at something you are willing to destroy immediately.
ML…
Classic Hollywoodism.
Arnie walks into a gunshop and buys a full-auto submachinegun – an Uzi – off the shelf, no licence, no background-check…….. and Australians think that that is how things are in America.
I don’t know which is worse. Hollywood lying, or Australians for being so gullible.
No doubt you know that such firearms have been heavily restricted under federal legislation for many decades. They are rare, ownership is restricted to old models, and the licences are expensive a time-consuming to acquire.
Expect to see a lot more of this sort of thing if Democrat cities are going to withdraw the police from the streets, leaving them to very violent, rampaging mobs of scumbags and crims.
No policing will inevitably lead to vigilantism, or at least people armed in self-defence.
Imagine the fear that Darrell Brooks must have been feeling. Trapped in the vehicle, screaming unheeded for someone to help, being flung from side to side as the SUV careened along the street, looking on helplessly as it mowed down one innocent person after another.
I assume the defence will be that he was trying to pull the key out of the ignition, pushing with all his might on the brake pedal, and trying desperately to cut wires coming out of the steering column in his desperate attempts to save those White people.
I remember reading about one of Tiberius’ grandson choking on a pear, and that after an inquest it was determined that it has occurred while he had been playfully tossing bits of the fruit into the air and catching it with his mouth.
The tree was found guilty and punished by being uprooted and burned.
Surely that is the point we are at now with cars.
“…Australians think that that is how things are in America.”
The majority of states (now 26? maybe more) are “constitutional carry”.
Many no longer require a concealed carry permit.
Some, like Texas, require you to undergo firearms training before they will issue a concealed carry permit, which doesn’t seem too onerous.
It’s also worth noting that prior to the civil war, the US government hired mercenary ships, complete with cannons etc, so the idea that the founders didn’t intend for private citizens to have the ability to have the same arms as the Government is laughable.
Killer cars!
“Imagine the fear that Darrell Brooks must have been feeling.”
Another interesting media dichotomy:
They widely published Rittenhouse’s social media posts in support of “Blue Lives Matter” and attending a Trump rally as “proof” of his political intentions and “white supremacy”.
Yet when Andy Ngo published Brooks’ social media posts in support of BLM and on how to get away with running over and killing white people with no comment or opinion on what it meant, suddenly it turns out that publishing such posts is “not relevant” and “racist” etc etc.
When Sir Robert Peel founded the modern, civilian Police, he laid down a set of ten fundamental principles that were to guide the actions of the Police, ensure that they had maximum public support and cooperation…. and were effective at their job.
They are still taught to recruits in many services as part of their basic theory. One of them is as follows.
The idea that only government-appointed officers should be involved in upholding the law and protecting our communities from violent criminals should be as abhorrent as any other centralised, bureaucratic intervention in our lives.
Historically, “vigilance committees”, are an extension of the ancient idea that the community should act to protect itself in the absence of government action. Its precedence can be found in British law that encouraged – even required – every adult male to turn out and join the “Hue and Cry” after malefactors.
A historical analysis of vigilance activity in the US shows that it almost always acted according to accepted legal principle in the absence of paid and appointed government agents. It generally consisted of the majority of adult males in the community, acting in public. They held elections, held trials – including appointing defenders to argue for the accused – elected juries and abided by the results. In small communities with no facilities or paid officers, jailing was a limited option, so a common penalty if guilt was established, was whipping and/or expulsion from the community. Hanging was less common and (as a historical aside) Colonel Lynch did not hang anyone.
No course of action is without problems, but when law-enforcement is divorced from the community it purports to serve, problems are more likely, rather than less.
JC
what is supposed to be a peaceful country
At the time, the street was in a city being destroyed by “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests. Many other cities were suffering the same fate. It might have been “what is supposed to be a peaceful country”, but the reality was not consistence with that supposition.
If the cops were allowed to do their jobs the citizens would have no need to patrol the streets.
The blame lays squarely on the idiots in charge who allow these “mostly peaceful riots” to continue unabated.
Some people have had enough of this hands off policing BS.
It wouldn’t have happened if it was an EV.
Kneel…
Yep.
The primary driver of firearms law change has been the introduction of Shall Issue, laws. This is legislation removing from Police, the ability to refuse members of the public licences to carry weapons in public, other than under certain specified criteria.
If you had a clean criminal record and passed certain basic tests on knowledge of the law and safe handling, it was mandatory for the Police to issue a Permit to Carry.
Inevitably, there were dire predictions that the streets would run with blood, and that Americans would be shooting each other over parking spots. As the data came in, it became obvious that introducing such laws produced a marked decrease in crime and over 20-25 years, over 40 of the 50 states either introduced similar laws… or decided that licences were ineffective and unnecessary. (Commonly called “Constitutional Carry”).
Over the same period, firearm deaths dropped by roughly 50%. We can argue that there are other factors also in play, but the one thing we can’t argue , is that allowing good people to carry firearms for self-defence leads to more deaths.
Not with any honesty.
Brucesays:
November 26, 2021 at 10:28 am
Bruce, +1.
As for talking about “gun culture”…
Does anyone here really think that the following all have the same attitude toward firearms?
Yes
they all believe it is ok to own, carry and use a gun .. that’s gun culture, it’s not a complicated thing
attitude?
there’s the non-US person’s classic misunderstanding of US gun culture, for Americans, it is not complicated, it doesn’t require a particular attitude to own, carry and use guns.
guns are an everyday part of American life, it is as simple as that
It’s only in the last 50 to 100 years that most Australians, and probably most Westerners, have had quick access to a police force who can respond within minutes to a violent act. Before that most households had firearms to defend themselves. It wasn’t just a man thing. Mothers and daughters were expected, especially in rural communities, to know how to handle a rifle for their own protection and managing livestock.
If you asked Australians 100 years ago that their rifles needed to be handed in then on both sides of the political fence you would of had a riot. Since that time we’ve lost the will for self protection in this country. The US has shown that police forces for political reasons sometimes stand down. That has set back the gun control movement decades in that country. It will take a period of lawlessness in Australia for gun control to fall down here. It will start with a black market (like South Africa) and soon everyone will have protection.
Yairs Bear N, the old mantle clock that was a wedding present for my grandparents in 1900 ticking my life away as it ticked theirs away, held a small .25 calibre revolver for Grandmother when the men were out on the “run” mustering. My tenth birthday pressie was a .22 and the deal was to get a wallaby for dog tucker and fish trap bait, anything I shot outside the marsupial I had to eat with the exception of vermin, and my little sister wasn’t considered to be vermin.
“Over the same period, firearm deaths dropped by roughly 50%.”
Not only that Peter, but also note that the places with the worst “gun violence” are those bastions of leftism (California, New York and Chicago) where owning a firearm is next to impossible for an ordinary person – in NY, eg, living in a high-crime area and being on night shift (the most dangerous time to be about) and asking for a license for self protection will in the vast majority of cases result in rejection of the application.
In other words, a large percentage of the gun violence perpetrated is where it is already illegal (or very difficult) to have a firearm.
Then too, there is the case of the old lady (60+ IIRC) who was stopped after entering NJ from PA, advised the officer quite calmly that she had a concealed firearm with a (PA) permit for same, and was unceremoniously arrested and charged with firearm offenses. Officer could have quite easily advised her that carrying such a weapon was illegal in NJ and escorted her back to PA border, but chose to arrest and charge her.
The ignorance is stunning, as is evident from the KR trial – the prosecutor pointed an AR-15 style weapon at the jury with his finger on the trigger! And while the magazine was removed, he didn’t check the chamber first!
Such ignorance is also shown by the insistence that an AR-15 is an “assault weapon” – no, it is a semi-auto only and an assault weapon as used by armies is typically able to be used as either semi-auto, “burst” (typically 3 round full auto) and full auto. But it “looks” scary.
In case you didn’t know, the AR-15 is the most common long arm in the USA – they are very popular, and can be 5.56 up to (I believe) 7.62. KR had a 5.56 (.223 IIRC).
I just don’t see that happening. Even now, the law ostensibly stands on the side of the criminal should you injure one who is breaking into your home and threatening you. You have to prove that you used the absolute minimum of force (generally no deadly weapon), that you absolutely feared for your life and that you couldn’t escape.
Americans find this incomprehensible.
“Americans find this incomprehensible.”
It IS incomprehensible!
Not so much that you are required to defend yourself at law for your actions (if someone is killed or seriously injured, then of course you should!), but rather that someone can break into your house, be carrying a knife, and you are not allowed to assume that they have nefarious intent and are prepared to use their weapon against you. In such a case, the onus should be on the prosecution to show you knew (or should have reasonably have known) there was no material risk to your or your family that required such drastic action as you took. FFS, you were at home, probably abed, and someone breaks the law by entering, they need to prove it is you who have badly over-reacted, not you who has to show you had no choice!
Staying in some accomodation here, the manager is a really smart bloke.
Had his own med company in China.
CCP took everything off him and he fled to Australia.
Reckons the vaccines are shit.
On a slightly different tangent.
This is the completely predictable outcome if law enforcement fails.
People only agreed to stop forming possies and hanging thieves/ rapists/ murderers once there was an alternative.
If the contract between law enforcement and “ norms” is broken then you go back to “ the good old days” and a lot of criminals will discover the police were protecting them as well.
I’m very much not saying this is a good thing.
ritenhouse had a gun to protect a car lot, after another one was torched.
also there was nothing particularly peaceful with the situation.
I remember some koreans also defending their shops with guns during looting in LA way back. nothing new.
Ask yourself this one simple question:
Do you think Kyle would be dead, or alive, if he didn’t have the rifle?
Forty-Five years ago, in a peaceful country, in Melbourne, nobody seemed to notice a bloke carrying a rifle, never mind stop him to enquire if he was aged +17.
(Rifle carrying in Melbourne CBD experiment by the not-gun-friendly ABC)
“We’ve been wandering up & down Little Collins Street now for about 5 minutes. And whilst a lot of people noticed I was carrying a gun, what was amazing was very few of them seemed concerned.
And then again there were almost as many people who didn’t even seem to notice that I was carrying a gun.
By the way, this isn’t a real gun, it’s just make-believe for the occasion, because, to carry a firearm in public is an offence.”
this is why china can’t really progress on its own and has to steal everything from the west, the ppl there know the CCP will come and take their share, which can be up to 100%. Russia isn’t far behind, the criminal cartels do the same.
Bilie:
Otherwise known as “Living in their own life movie as the principal actor.” Then they hit the fact they are not Rambo, or Stallone, and they don’t write the script they inhabit.
Reality is a bitch, man.
Not just Americans.
Apparently according to Victorian law, if crims break into my place, I am not allowed to defend myself (possibly even using lethal force), but am supposed to rely on their “good nature” that they will not bash or kill me, but merely rob me.
I have heard of at least one case in Melbourne many years ago, where intruders broke into someone’s house, and despite the owner’s cooperating with them and his being tied up, as a parting gesture one of the intruders killed him as he was lying there helpless.
Anybody who breaks into my house is putting his own life at risk; I am not putting any faith in their not bashing or killing me, police or prosecutors be damned.
Lee
Anybody who breaks into my house is putting his own life at risk; I am not putting any faith in their not bashing or killing me, police or prosecutors be damned.
Better to be judged by 12 than to be carried on a box by four.
Absolutely, John.
Precisely!
“American Gun Culture” has been used as a bogey to frighten the children since the 70s. There is no such thing as a single, discrete entity.
Aided by one E G Whitlam’s actions in disbanding the Australian Cadet Corps. One of many actions we can now see had the object of destroying the Australian culture.
” it’s time” seemed innocent but nearly all of us did not understand the unstated “for the communist revolution in Australia”.
Sorry, mate, but you are talking through your hat.
Unless you believe that having a dick makes you a part of a “rape culture”, you need to accept that culture is NOT a simple thing and that having one point in common does not make us all the same.
Incidentally, criminals are more often in favour of gun-control, because they like unarmed victims and have no intention of obeying such laws themselves.
It’s entirely comprehensible. The political class fear that in certain circumstances the general populace might use them in defence from attack by the political class.
The fact that they have disarmed us is a declaration that they do not wish us well.
I wasn’t talking about guns, but just the concept of self-protection/self-preservation. Australian law ostensibly makes it a crime to defend yourself from someone intent on maiming or killing you.
But in hindsight, I guess that’s the whole point of the law, the government doesn’t want people to think that they have a right to self-protection/self-preservation, lest they turn on the government.
The shooters party in NSW got the law changed so if you are claiming self defense, the prosecution have to prove you were not in fear of your life.
Everywhere else you have to prove you were in fear of your life.
Everyone get the difference and why it matters?
Hypothetically, Australian law recognises a right to self-defence.
They get around that by arguing that if you PREPARE to defend yourself, then you knew that the threat existed in time to ring the cops. (Yeah, right).
Then they put the onus on you to prove what was going through your mind at the time, and even if you are acquitted, you are left needing to sell your house to pay your legal bills.
The process is the punishment.
Kneelsays:
November 26, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Accidently clicked “report comment” instesd of giving the
thumbs up
Sorry about confusion
The Krauts and some bleeding hearts above-it’s the Vibe.
I, for one, am outraged he didn’t have a back up pistol.
I was never a fan of the ColtAR15/M16 variant.
Now they come with holes in the front up to .450” and have had years of development I can see why they have become so popular.
“An armed society is a polite society.”
Seems like.
Funny how one doesn’t hear of riots in the similarly-named Kennesaw, in Georgia. Maybe it is because the city administration passed a regulation requiring the head of every household to own a firearm. It’s not strictly enforced, but it seems to have sent a message. Violent crime is very rare, there.
If JC still can’t work out why many Americans are comfortable with the public carriage of firearms, it is because this makes it safer for good people and more dangerous for violent thugs. Don’t know how many times and ways this needs to be shown.
My American B-I-L, former medico, went to a medical school reunion. Met up with an old flame from Texas and was having a drink with her when she knocked her “pocketbook” (big purse) on the floor. B picked it up for her, hefting it and saying, jokingly, “What do you have in there? A handgun?”
“Of course”, was the purely matter of fact reply.
“…you knew that the threat existed in time to ring the cops.”
Funny, isn’t it? In the US, if you are committing a felony offense and someone dies, that is felony murder – you can be found guilty of this even though it seems completely unreasonable, as per the
3 guys who just got found guilty of it, even the guy who turned up a bit later and videoed it on his phone was guilty of felony murder, despite the fact he was well apart from the “action” and wasn’t carrying a firearm or other weapon, nor involved in any struggle or assault.
Despite the “victim” moving towards the “criminal” and then attempting to take the “criminals” firearm away from him, and that this resulted in the firearm discharging, fatally wounding the “victim”, this was still defined as “felony murder”.
The felony of the criminal? Apparently an illegal citizens arrest – where the law is so ambiguous that neither the several prosecutors, several defense attourneys nor the judge could agree on what the statute meant. The judge should have instructed the jury on what the law meant – he did not. And well established precedent is that under such circumstances, any ambiguity is to favour the defendant, not the state. The judge did not even instruct the jury that this was the case.
Just like the Rittenhouse case, the video seems to show reasonable grounds for a self defense claim.
But the media cheers it all on because the “victim” was black, while the “criminals” were white.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?513485-3/gun-control-myths