What's the Endgame Here?

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Who do we have to credit for the invention???

Historians typically recognize Chinese fire lances, which were invented in the 10th century, as the first guns. These bamboo or metal tubes projected flames and shrapnel at their targets. Cannons appeared in Italy around 1320, where they were modified as European nations waged many wars. By the 16th century, European firearms had become far more advanced -- and far more deadly -- than their counterparts in the East.

Just saying!

It was only a matter of time to be fair to the Chinese, but it was gunpowder that drove the "invention".

Edited January 13, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

A June 2018 report from the Small Arms Survey estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, both legally and otherwise, out of a worldwide total of 857 million firearms.21 Jun 2018

That is a staggering number when you consider there are 235 million people of voting age

The UK has 1.835 Million guns, roughly 1 for every 40 people (way more than I thought)

 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

22 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

A June 2018 report from the Small Arms Survey estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, both legally and otherwise, out of a worldwide total of 857 million firearms.21 Jun 2018

My neighbor down the road has well over a dozen guns, assorted sizes and types.

[James Regan + 1,776]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I thought James was Scottish??

He does love a big gun though😂

Yes sir I certainly do....

[James Regan + 1,776]

[Papillon + 485]

57 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

It was only a matter of time to be fair to the Chinese, but it was gunpowder that drove the "invention".

Indeed it was sir. If in doubt blame the Chinese. Or Democrats.     /sarc

Luckily as the years went by though, other nations saw no need for big guns to make up for something small. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

2 minutes ago, Papillon said:

Luckily as the years went by though, other nations saw no need for big guns to make up for something small. 

Are you having a pop at James?

[Papillon + 485]

Just now, Rob Plant said:

Are you having a pop at James?

Not at all sir. I learnt my lesson there soon after joining. 

[Papillon + 485]

1 hour ago, James Regan said:

Very true sir. May I possibly counter with ''just because your citizens continually murder each other, doesn't mean you're right''.

It is also telling that this needs explaining, but when eight year olds are handed deadly weapons the thought processes become rather clear do they not? That's assuming they exist of course.

@Rob Plant Incidentally sir, DT replied with precisely this: ''lol I told you man, god and guns, don't bother, doesn't matter how many both of them kill, they won't listen.'' 

He then asked who had asked this, I informed him it was yourself and he replied: ''lol Rob knows my thoughts on pretty much everything man, he's winding you up, especially if he knows I'm Buddhist. Trust me, don't waste your time, thou shalt not kill but check out my arsenal of deadly weapons that I need to protect me from my own government. It's nothing to do with every nutter having one apparently.''

Edited January 13, 2020 by Papillon
Received reply.

[PE Scott + 563]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

My neighbor down the road has well over a dozen guns, assorted sizes and types.

Haha, I have a couple dozen 1911's....more than half of them have never been shot. Thats just 1911's though, I still have a bunch of other pistols, rifles, and shotguns. I collect 1911's that catch my eye and I collect fine woodworking tools. I think both represent finely crafted precision TOOLS and mostly I just admire the craftsmanship. So, it doesn't seem  any more weird to me that you might own a couple dozen guns as, let's say, expensive pottery or nice paintings or whatever your thing is.

Edit: If I lived in the UK, I'd probably still like fancy shotguns. I might also collect something more in line with English history....like medieval halburts, armor, a mace or two

Edited January 13, 2020 by PE Scott

[Billyjack + 58]

The main purpose of US "wars" whether a war on drugs, poverty, terrorism, etc is to create a massive pool of month from which politicians, bureaucrats or their cronies can steal. 

[SERWIN + 749]

On 1/8/2020 at 6:27 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Trump enforces the red line on Iran

President Trump’s decision to kill Iranian Quds Force commander Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani should have come as no surprise to the Iranian regime. The administration had drawn a clear red line, warning Iranian leaders they would pay a severe price if they killed a U.S. citizen.

The Washington Post reported last summer that, during a May visit to Baghdad, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo “privately delivered warnings intended for Iranian leaders that any attack by Tehran or its proxies resulting in the death of even one American service member will generate a military counterattack.” The United States had seen a spike in intelligence that Iranian-backed militias might resume the kinds of attacks against U.S. forces that were common during the Iraq war. Pompeo said this would not be tolerated.

The message the administration sent to Iran was crystal clear: (1) any attacks on Americans would elicit a military response; and (2) the United States would henceforth hold Iran responsible for the actions of its terrorist proxies. To underscore the message, Trump designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — including its Quds Force — as a foreign terrorist organization. This made Soleimani a legitimate military target.

For months, Iran danced around Trump’s new red line, carrying out increasingly bold attacks against U.S. targets, allies and interests — but assiduously avoiding U.S. casualties. First, it attacked Japanese and Norwegian oil tankers. Then, it shot down an unmanned U.S. drone (while avoiding a manned American P-8 aircraft that was reportedly flying in the area). Then, it attacked Saudi oil facilities.

In each case, the president demonstrated enormous restraint. He tightened economic sanctions on the regime in Tehran. He launched cyberattacks against Iran’s military capabilities. And he warned Iran that his patience was not without limits. “I think a lot of restraint has been shown by us but that doesn’t mean we’re going to show it in the future,” Trump said.

Iran misread Trump’s restraint for weakness — and miscalculated. On Dec. 27, an Iranian proxy militia, Kataib Hezbollah, launched a rocket attack against a military base in the Iraqi city of Kirkuk that killed a U.S. military contractor. With that attack, Iran crossed the red line Trump had set. Trump struck back militarily, hitting Kataib Hezbollah targets in Iraq and Syria — and U.S. officials began discussing a strike against Iran.

Meanwhile, Iran escalated further. Kataib Hezbollah overran and set fire to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, an attack a senior U.S. official told me was coordinated with Soleimani. U.S. officials watched as Soleimani flew into Baghdad to meet with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the leader of the Kataib Hezbollah militia. According to the U.S. official, the United States had “exquisite intelligence” that the two men were planning an attack that could have killed hundreds of Americans.

Seizing that opportunity, Trump took them both out. His action was defensive, preemptive and lawful. Had Trump not acted and more Americans had died, he would have been excoriated — and rightly so. Instead, he took bold action that disrupted that attack and took Soleimani and Muhandis off the battlefield.

Trump hit Soleimani in Iraq because he made the mistake of coming there to plan a terrorist attack. But if Iran miscalculates again, then the regime has been warned: Next time, the target will likely be Iran.

 

I do also remember another past president drawing a "red line" that Iran not only crossed over, they danced around on it.... I remember that very same POTUS telling Americans while he was on the campaign trail that we would NOT send more troops over to the ME, and the first thing that happened was.... More troops going overseas. 

Maybe we should trade off with Russia and China. Let them have the ME and deal with that mess and the US could take Venezuela and work on that mess. Both ideas get us closer to our target and both accomplish the same goals.... Maybe trump and Putin and Xi could have a card game and put those messes in the pot....

[SERWIN + 749]

4 hours ago, Papillon said:

Mr Plant, I could not help but notice this American anecdote in the thread. By the way I have asked DT for you sir. 

''If a gun range instructor hands a fully automatic MAC-10 submachine gun to a young child, of the age of 6 or 8, and the boy pulls the trigger and the gun gets away from him by the recoil, and a wild round kills someone, that is not murder.  This actually happened at a range in Massachusetts''.

Delightful stories as ever with regard to firearms. I would have thought giving a young child a deadly weapon was utterly moronic personally. Some people do not feel this way clearly. Make of that what you will sir. 

 

I have handed a gun to my son, but I was smart enough to think about the possibilities beforehand. With my .45 I loaded one round, that way if the gun did recoil badly enough that he lost control of it, there weren't any more rounds in the pistol that could be accidentally discharged. You Tube has so many of these types of videos, where someone can't handle the first shot and the gun goes wildly out of control with more ammunition at the ready. One was a woman trying a .44 mag revolver, and she squeezed of two rounds so fast if you weren't paying attention you would miss it, I've never seen a revolver fire so quickly. Another of them has a woman trying a .44 mag and the barrel flew straight back and hit her on the forehead. If she had squeezed another round off at that second..... Gun safety has a lot to do with common sense, and handing a child a fully loaded automatic weapon was a tragedy of common sense. So in that case it was gross negligence on the part of the trainer to hand that over to a child. 

[James Regan + 1,776]

1 hour ago, PE Scott said:

Haha, I have a couple dozen 1911's....more than half of them have never been shot. Thats just 1911's though, I still have a bunch of other pistols, rifles, and shotguns. I collect 1911's that catch my eye and I collect fine woodworking tools. I think both represent finely crafted precision TOOLS and mostly I just admire the craftsmanship. So, it doesn't seem  any more weird to me that you might own a couple dozen guns as, let's say, expensive pottery or nice paintings or whatever your thing is.

Edit: If I lived in the UK, I'd probably still like fancy shotguns. I might also collect something more in line with English history....like medieval halburts, armor, a mace or two

PE Nail on the head your are obviously an Engineer ( no diploma required the word engineer has been bastardized, I work in Engineering there for I am an ? Engine? Or Engineer) indeed as your collection of woodworking tools it’s what those tools are capable of making in the right hands, guns are the same for me, engineered masterpieces by craftsmen especially older guns, I don’t care for modern guns that is unless I could have a 20mm Electric Mini Gun to shoot down missiles or a Barret .50 that will stop a truck, it’s the appreciation of the work and design that’s what captures me. Shooting guns bang cock bang cock bang not for me or being shot by guns either, not up there on my list but having a gun available by my side if some homicidle maniac came into my house trying to rape me and kill my wife then hell yeah im full Republican.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 1/12/2020 at 12:06 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Actually,it is.  The requirement in US criminal law is that the defendant have a "culpable state of mind."   And, that is "intent."

The major and most common category is drunken driving offenses.

 

How often does that work?  Pretty rare I'm guessing.

Apparently a couple people have gotten off for rape because they "sleep raped" the person and therefore it was not a voluntary act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_sex#Legal_cases

 

Edited January 13, 2020 by Enthalpic

[PE Scott + 563]

2 hours ago, James Regan said:

homicidle maniac came into my house trying to rape me and kill my wife

Lol, I don't know if this means your a very pretty man or you have a formidable wife

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. Specifically, if I'm away in the field (as I often am) my 100lb wife has a means of protecting herself. After all, when seconds matter, the police are only minutes away.

I digress though, sorry for getting away from the very important "what is the endgame?" 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

14 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I thought James was Scottish??

He does love a big gun though😂

He is Scottish....but as you’d expect from a Scottish wanka who practices the Black Art, he just robbed a good ol’ American redneck joke. Typical!😂

[ronwagn + 6,290]

12 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

A June 2018 report from the Small Arms Survey estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, both legally and otherwise, out of a worldwide total of 857 million firearms.21 Jun 2018

That is a staggering number when you consider there are 235 million people of voting age

The UK has 1.835 Million guns, roughly 1 for every 40 people (way more than I thought)

 

Well, you are ripe for a successful invasion in that case. Also defenseless if a future government becomes even worse than the one you just voted out. 

[PE Scott + 563]

13 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

A June 2018 report from the Small Arms Survey estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, both legally and otherwise, out of a worldwide total of 857 million firearms.21 Jun 2018

That is a staggering number when you consider there are 235 million people of voting age

The UK has 1.835 Million guns, roughly 1 for every 40 people (way more than I thought)

 

I just realized that if these numbers are right, there's no reason to be alarmed. Like always, we've got you covered, we have well more than enough guns to arm all of you. So sleep well, your redneck neighbors have your back.

[Papillon + 485]

@ronwagn  Have your weapons aided you sir in the attempt at impeachment, or indeed any governmental wrongdoings in your entire life? Or do Republicans there merely whine about it while realising they have no power deep down? Does the following sentence suggest protection from government or from other nations and 'successful invasions' in your view? 

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope.

It appears to be yet another law to me, such as the one about conflicts and war, where yet again America can pick and choose its meaning at will, and so renders it utterly pointless. It even suggests itself that there is debate to its meaning and original premise. Utterly pointless to discuss as DT said.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Papillon

[James Regan + 1,776]

13 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

A June 2018 report from the Small Arms Survey estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, both legally and otherwise, out of a worldwide total of 857 million firearms.21 Jun 2018

That is a staggering number when you consider there are 235 million people of voting age

The UK has 1.835 Million guns, roughly 1 for every 40 people (way more than I thought)

 

Lots of shotguns for gentleman hunters, hounds and horses “damn your eyes man”

[James Regan + 1,776]

17 minutes ago, Papillon said:

It appears to be yet another law to me, such as the one about conflicts and war, where yet again America can pick and choose its meaning at will, and so renders it utterly pointless.

Regarding conflicts and war and if Trump was allowed to do what he did by striking soulimani etc. We Brits are no different I don’t hear any rhetoric about the Thatcher war when we bombed the General Belgrano a troop carrier which was outside the exclusion zone heading for Argentina during the Falkland war. This was a proud day to be a UK citizen, watching our soldiers and government committing what amounts to war crimes.

We can’t have double standards we took out a non threatening target for a position of raising moral to the British public.

God save the queen and keep your hands off our territory.

Edited January 14, 2020 by James Regan

[Papillon + 485]

It was a reference to a definition of the law sir in the other thread and nothing more. It has nothing to do with double standards, I merely wished to know the full position with regard to American law from Otis. 

[James Regan + 1,776]

3 minutes ago, Papillon said:

It was a reference to a definition of the law sir in the other thread and nothing more. It has nothing to do with double standards, I merely wished to know the full position with regard to American law from Otis. 

Spoken like a true village committee member , where are the park benches now. Have you banned the kids from skateboarding in ASDAs car park as well?

[Papillon + 485]

You are rather amusing sir, but the village is only large enough for the need of a small local shop fortunately. There is no ASDA within several miles I'm happy to say, and hence no skateboarding children that I need show concern for.

With regard to the Americans 'having our back' by the way, would that be in a similar sense to the Second World War perhaps? I seem to remember they took a few years to assist, waited until Germany had invaded several nations and killed a countless number, and even when they did enter the war they were funding both sides of it.

What are your thoughts sir, I would presume you have an alternate view as you appear to be somewhat of an American apologist recently.    /sarc