Happy Birthday

Lowaicue said:
It is, surely, a matter of degree.
Yes there are those who prey on weaker members of society and here is no exception. However it differs here in one important respect. We rarely see gratuitous violence. The pragmatic Chinese crook will ignore a few bucks on the street but will turn over a gold shop. The logic is that if he's caught he's going down, so go down with something worthwhile.
Assaults are usually pay-backs gang on gang and the public has very little to fear.
So people here do not seek to be armed, do not live their lives in fear, tend not to confront problems but find ways to work round them. They often find it strange that westerners seem to be out looking for trouble when there is no pecunary advantage to be had.
So when you use terms like 'there is no such thing as ....' and 'everyone does this or that' it would be as well to remember that your sphere of reference is somewhat limited.
Click to expand...

whether its purse snatching only, or large scale robberies, it matters little. crime is crime. Do you have small gangs of people who wish to do nothing more than beat on people? I know we do here, but is that my fault? is it Damos fault? Is it any one person in particulars fault? no, it just is.

you need to stop trying to portray your little fucked up communist oppression as some sort of utopia....because it is not. Tiananmen square remind you of anything?
 
christiefan915 said:
Yes, let's clarify. Several reports came out a few years ago with these numbers. If nine out of ten citizens own one or more guns, I call that armed to the teeth. However, I'll be happy to look at any report you cite that gives different numbers.

GENEVA (Reuters) - The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.

U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said.

"There is roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. Without the United States, though, this drops to about one firearm per 10 people," it said.
Click to expand...

WE'RE NUMBER 1
WE'RE NUMBER 1
USA
USA
USA
:tongout:
 
SmarterThanYou said:
actually, its not. It's one of the main reasons that Japan never attempted to invade our main homeland.
Click to expand...
Back in the 1930's one of the first things that Churchill did was to ramp up small arms manufacturing and get them into the hands of the citizens. At that time they had something like 50 tanks in all of England but the Germans were too scared to attack Britain, because of armed citizenry.
 
Lowaicue said:
It is, surely, a matter of degree.
Yes there are those who prey on weaker members of society and here is no exception. However it differs here in one important respect. We rarely see gratuitous violence. The pragmatic Chinese crook will ignore a few bucks on the street but will turn over a gold shop. The logic is that if he's caught he's going down, so go down with something worthwhile.
Assaults are usually pay-backs gang on gang and the public has very little to fear.
So people here do not seek to be armed, do not live their lives in fear, tend not to confront problems but find ways to work round them. They often find it strange that westerners seem to be out looking for trouble when there is no pecunary advantage to be had.
So when you use terms like 'there is no such thing as ....' and 'everyone does this or that' it would be as well to remember that your sphere of reference is somewhat limited.
Click to expand...

CRIME FREE - YOUR ASS

Factors That Contribute to the Trafficking Infrastructure

Organized crime plays a significant role in trafficking mainland Chinese women to Hong Kong. Furthermore, because Taiwan bans direct air and sea links with mainland China, passengers usually are transported between the two through Hong Kong or Macau.

Forms of Trafficking

Women from China’s southwestern region are trafficked to Hong Kong for commercial sexual exploitation. Women from Guizhou are lured from rural areas with promises of high-paying jobs in Hong Kong, where they are instead forced into prostitution. One 19-year-old victim from Guizhou province claimed she was forced to entertain more than 400 customers over a 26-day period and as many as 28 in a single day. Another woman claimed that she had been forced to service 130 clients in a 1-month period. Both women claimed that they were also forced to make pornographic films.
Thai and Filipino women are brought into Hong Kong on the pretense of being given jobs as entertainers; instead, they often find themselves locked in apartments during the day and forced to work as hostesses in bars at night, providing sex to customers.

http://www.protectionproject.org/human_rights_reports/report_documents/hong.doc

Gee; I wonder how much worse it's gotten, over the past 7 years??
 
SmarterThanYou said:
actually, its not. It's one of the main reasons that Japan never attempted to invade our main homeland.
Click to expand...

I've always thought of it this way.
The US is like one really big family and like a lot of families, we don't always agree with each other.
But let someone from outside of the family (another country) try to move into our home, univited, and we'll put aside our differences long enough to kick the intruders ass.

Think of the movie Red Dawn.
I can see the most red neck KKK member standing in a fox hole with the most radical Black Panther, sharing what they have.

This is what I think we've gotten away from.
At one time, no counrty would think of screwing with the US; because we would send in the Military to kick ass and take names.
Then when they were done, they fell back and let the Politicians do what they do best. MAKE NICE.
It's time we returned to that time.
Anyone have a WAYBACK MACHINE??
 
Southern Man said:
Back in the 1930's one of the first things that Churchill did was to ramp up small arms manufacturing and get them into the hands of the citizens. At that time they had something like 50 tanks in all of England but the Germans were too scared to attack Britain, because of armed citizenry.
Click to expand...

That was back when the English had some balls.
They've allowed themselves to become neutered and now it appears that they want the US to follow suit.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
whether its purse snatching only, or large scale robberies, it matters little. crime is crime. Do you have small gangs of people who wish to do nothing more than beat on people? I know we do here, but is that my fault? is it Damos fault? Is it any one person in particulars fault? no, it just is.

you need to stop trying to portray your little fucked up communist oppression as some sort of utopia....because it is not. Tiananmen square remind you of anything?
Click to expand...

I am not suggesting for one moment that it is all your fault or the fault of Damo. I am suggesting, as have others before and since, that the society of which you are proud and that many of you regard as being in some way special, tends to be unique in ways that are unacceptable to the rest of the world and with that in mind you should not be surprised when that world objects to you trying to force your way of life on them.
I was here in June 1989. I and about a million others marched in protest. I designed large posters showing a world shedding tears. Every June 4th we remember with sadness the happenings in Tien an men square. You see, I live in Hong Kong. It is called Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) because it has its own laws, its own police, its own currency although under the 'watchful' eye of Beijing. However please dont just take my word for it, you can google hong Kong and see for yourself.
BTW the answer to your first point is No. we do not have small gangs of people who wish nothing more than to beat people up. It is an unknown western phenomenon.
 
Southern Man said:
Back in the 1930's one of the first things that Churchill did was to ramp up small arms manufacturing and get them into the hands of the citizens. At that time they had something like 50 tanks in all of England but the Germans were too scared to attack Britain, because of armed citizenry.
Click to expand...

Not quite, old boy.
 
Lowaicue said:
I am not suggesting for one moment that it is all your fault or the fault of Damo. I am suggesting, as have others before and since, that the society of which you are proud and that many of you regard as being in some way special, tends to be unique in ways that are unacceptable to the rest of the world and with that in mind you should not be surprised when that world objects to you trying to force your way of life on them.
I was here in June 1989. I and about a million others marched in protest. I designed large posters showing a world shedding tears. Every June 4th we remember with sadness the happenings in Tien an men square. You see, I live in Hong Kong. It is called Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) because it has its own laws, its own police, its own currency although under the 'watchful' eye of Beijing. However please dont just take my word for it, you can google hong Kong and see for yourself.
BTW the answer to your first point is No. we do not have small gangs of people who wish nothing more than to beat people up. It is an unknown western phenomenon.
Click to expand...

I spent some time in Hong Kong and went wherever I pleased with no fear or problems. Unlike in New York City or Miama to name two other cities I have spent time in.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
That was back when the English had some balls.
They've allowed themselves to become neutered and now it appears that they want the US to follow suit.
Click to expand...
They've still got balls, but just like in the US the ones carrying them keep them in their pants and are too busy working and paying taxes. But if pushed, they'll shut the liberals up and go to war.
 
Lowaicue said:
Not quite, old boy.
Click to expand...

belme1201 said:
Congratulations, your reply is huge in its understatement. "not quite" by a frickin mile! It must come from NRA mythology, unless the RAF, Navy, and Brit radar were considered small arms.
Click to expand...

Page 155 of this book is a long quote by Churchill expressing his opinion on the matter. Read on through page 156 and after the sub title "The Second World War". You will learn the history of how Britain disarmed its citizens after WW1 in a failed attempt to deter crime the quickly re-armed them in a successful attempt to thwart a German invasion.

Then there's the the ultimate success story of an armed citizenry: Switzerland. This even includes another quote by Churchill on the benefits of an armed citizenry.

Switzerland, Europes' most peaceful country, has no standing army. Instead, the country is defended by a militia composed of virtually all male citizens. The government issues rifles to these citizens, and the rifles are kept at their homes. ....

Exemplifying the slogan, "What if they gave a war and no one came?" Switzerland avoided both World War I and World War II. Though Switzerland was surrounded by the Axis powers, even Hitler was afraid to invade this country of riflemen.

Winston Churchill wrote in 1944: "Of all the neutrals, Switzerland has the greatest right to distinction....She has been a democratic State, standing for freedom in self-defence among her mountains, and in thought, in spite of race, largely on our side."
Click to expand...
http://www.barefootsworld.net/switzrld.html
 
Southern Man said:
Page 155 of this book is a long quote by Churchill expressing his opinion on the matter. Read on through page 156 and after the sub title "The Second World War". You will learn the history of how Britain disarmed its citizens after WW1 in a failed attempt to deter crime the quickly re-armed them in a successful attempt to thwart a German invasion.
Click to expand...

From what i can see page 155 contains a long quote from the Prince of Wales rather than Churchill. Or am i looking at the wrong thing?
 
Southern Man said:
Page 155 of this book is a long quote by Churchill expressing his opinion on the matter. Read on through page 156 and after the sub title "The Second World War". You will learn the history of how Britain disarmed its citizens after WW1 in a failed attempt to deter crime the quickly re-armed them in a successful attempt to thwart a German invasion.

Then there's the the ultimate success story of an armed citizenry: Switzerland. This even includes another quote by Churchill on the benefits of an armed citizenry.

http://www.barefootsworld.net/switzrld.html
Click to expand...

So quickly were the people armed, in fact, that the VDF basically had NO guns and it was probably a good year after being formed into the Home Guard that they had any weapons. I KNOW for a fact that a our local Home Guard had only one single Lee Enfield 303 and that they paraded using broomsticks. Our local farmer would bring his 12 bore sometimes but cartridges were so rare that he never brought them to exercises. They thought it amusing, too.
For all their latent skills and their undoubted courage the men of that volunteer force never saw a German until they were forced to remove German towels from the poolside loungers many years after the end of the war.
You see Churchill was a fine figurehead but knew little of the masses being a member of the British aristocracy and having a small place in the country.
Winston Churchill was born in 1874 into a wealthy and famous family. His father was Lord Randolph Churchill and he was the grandson of the 7th Duke of Marlborough. Winston Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire. He was schooled at Harrow where it is said that he only put his name on the exam entrance paper to get in. Churchill went to the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst and gained a commission in the Fourth Hussars. He saw some military action and took part in the Battle of Omdurman in 1898.
 
charver said:
From what i can see page 155 contains a long quote from the Prince of Wales rather than Churchill. Or am i looking at the wrong thing?
Click to expand...
I stand corrected, that was Churchill's policy as exemplified by the Prince of Wales. There is a Churchill quote in the second link of my last post regarding the same issue with respect to Switzerland.
 
Lowaicue said:
So quickly were the people armed, in fact, that the VDF basically had NO guns and it was probably a good year after being formed into the Home Guard that they had any weapons. I KNOW for a fact that a our local Home Guard had only one single Lee Enfield 303 and that they paraded using broomsticks. Our local farmer would bring his 12 bore sometimes but cartridges were so rare that he never brought them to exercises. They thought it amusing, too.
For all their latent skills and their undoubted courage the men of that volunteer force never saw a German until they were forced to remove German towels from the poolside loungers many years after the end of the war.
You see Churchill was a fine figurehead but knew little of the masses being a member of the British aristocracy and having a small place in the country.
Winston Churchill was born in 1874 into a wealthy and famous family. His father was Lord Randolph Churchill and he was the grandson of the 7th Duke of Marlborough. Winston Churchill was born at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire. He was schooled at Harrow where it is said that he only put his name on the exam entrance paper to get in. Churchill went to the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst and gained a commission in the Fourth Hussars. He saw some military action and took part in the Battle of Omdurman in 1898.
Click to expand...

It took several years for British industry to ramp up production of not only small arms but tanks, airplanes and ships. Of course much of the supplies were purchased from the US, who's industry required a similar ramp-up period. During the transition period it was very common to employ decoys as you described.
 
Southern Man said:
They've still got balls, but just like in the US the ones carrying them keep them in their pants and are too busy working and paying taxes. But if pushed, they'll shut the liberals up and go to war.
Click to expand...

They better wake up pretty soon; because it was just a couple years ago that a Muslim basically said that they wouldn't conquer England through violence, but would instead use their own election process against them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top