Skyrad

Not correct... Picture of me firing a legal semi automatic long only a couple of weeks ago in the UK. You're deceiving people. It looks like an AR-15 type rifle, which is generally semi-auto in centerfire .223 caliber. But those are banned in England. So why don't you explain how yours is different from the norm so that it still qualifies as legal. Is it .22 rimfire? If so, then that's not really an AR-15 type rifle, and it's but a small, limited exception to the law that bans semi-auto long guns. By saying that my statement was "incorrect", you were implying that semi-auto long guns are not banned at all, that anything still goes, and that is patently untrue. Attached: photo of .223 versus .22 rimfire. I know which caliber I'd rather shoot: the .223 is good out to 600 yards. The .22 rimfire isn't worth crap beyond 100 yards. But I guess your government doesn't trust you with anything bigger than that little gnat cartridge. Show me anywhere where I said it was a .223 AR15. Oh, thats right I didn't did I. So as it is a legal semi automatic long, put in simple English....Your statement is incorrect. As for the round, if fired by someone who can soot it will still kill you. However, seeing as I'm not looking for 'GOOKS IN THE WIRE!' at 600 yards but enjoying practical rifle sports shooting thats all a bit by the by. But if you can actualy hit something at 600 without spay and pray then your in luck, just in case the Iranians decide to invade our government still 'trusts us' with full bore bolt action. In fact a mate has just got a Dragunov over here. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

No suprises there then. Of course they chose to instead deal with the US government diplomatically, and as a result enjoy a political environment that is primarily sovereign, including natural resource rights and the ability to self-govern, plus massive amounts of financial aid so they can enjoy the fruits of our economic success. Don't forget the beads... 'ooh...Look at the pretty beads, tell you what Kimosabi, you give me Montana and I'll give you the pretty beads......Yes?' 'Umm Yes.' 'OK Soldier you can take the gun away from the childs head now, and give them some wiskey!' When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

English girls do, its the Frogs and the Krauts that don't. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

No suprises there then. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

You're right, and I didn't word my post very well, it wasn't supposed to look like a dig at Darius in any way shape or form. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Maybe he's just Anti-Semantic! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

No argument there

Nothing worse than hairy down the inner thighs..Yech! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I see you've been on holiday (vacation) to London then. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Very good..

There is a big differnce between belonging to a religion and having a relationship with God. As a belife system in itself I'd argue that Atheism is a religion in itself. There are occasions where it is quite clear that religious folks are not in possession of all the information when coming to their conclusions about specific aspects of their faith. Take for example the debates on creationism that take place with people who's understanding of evolution is based on what Dr Dino has told them. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Whos joking? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Nicky Gumbel once said to me..'No-one was ever argued to faith'. Think about it, have you ever met a Christian who said...'You know, I used to be an Atheist, then I had a storming argument with a Christian and realised I was wrong and behold I found the Lord!' By all means give your testament when appropriate but to try and argue someone to faith is counterproductive and just reinforces negative stereotypes of Christians. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Wow how soon we forget Did you forget about the mysteries explosion that happened on a beach that killed yet more inocent Palestinians. The Israeli investigation said it was a mine left over by Hamas to prevent the Israelis from invading, BUT the independent non-Jewish non-Muslim American said from the blast it looks to have been caused by a shell fired from a canon NOT A MINE as the Israelis had said. (Read the thread). Now who would a smart person believe The Israelis who fuckedup or more likely didn’t give a damn if they killed a few more inocent Palestinians or the Independent analysis? You tell me Some times I wonder if you are really that forgetful or you just have selective memory. You know I'm usualy with you on these issues, however I don't think that the current attacks on Israel can be justified using the beach incident as a reason. After all it was quite a while ago and not even Hammas or Hizbollah have attemped to use the incident as a justification. There are many genuine reasons for disaproving of Israels actions and the Palastinian people have had untold crimes heaped upon them but so have innocent Israelis. As usual its the innocent on both sides that will suffer in this situation. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Thanks but I do not buy it. If this law was a reaction to a crime, what other perception would the public have of this law other than it is "intended" to reduce/eliminate violent gun crime? Regardless of what they "say" I can't see anyother reason for a public to endorce a law such as this ban. So once again I ask, who is really being lied to here? No inuendo intended Unlike in countries where firearms are widely available in the UK people do not grow up (generaly) with firearms. Hence they get their perception of them and the people that use them from films ergo most are bloody scared of them because they know nothing about them and belive that the only reason for having them is to kill people. Therefore it was easy to get the public behind a gun ban. Also for the same reason it wouldn't be a good idea to just let an uninformed and uneducated public who hold such belifes have access to totaly unrestricted firearms. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Unlike in certain parts of the states it wasn't legal to wander around carrying firearms in public. This law was passed as a knee jerk reaction to the acts of a couple of mentaly unstable people who went on a killing spree. It had nothing to do really with preventing deaths and everything to do with getting a popular vote on the back of a scared public. As you probably have gathered I am asking some leading questions to bolster an early point I was trying to make and I think you have hit it on the head. But even if this was a knee jerk reaction, still wouldn't one assume that the "intent" was to reduce gun/violent crime? I mean from a public point of view? Why else would it be done if not for that? Thanks for the info in any event. Because since the 1920's the British Home Office has strived to ensure that the only legal firearms in the Uk are those under their control. (Excuse me while I put on my foil hat) When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Unlike in certain parts of the states it wasn't legal to wander around carrying firearms in public. This law was passed as a knee jerk reaction to the acts of a couple of mentaly unstable people who went on couple of killing sprees. It had nothing to do really with preventing deaths and everything to do with getting a popular vote on the back of a scared public. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Hate to say it but that was just the trigger for the attacks. The conflict between radical Islamists and the west has been on the horizon since the 80s at least. If one takes the warped theology behind its inception its actually been comming since its inception back in the 50s. My brother and I discussed these times we live in back in the early 1980s, it was very predictable but the west chose to ignore the threat due to the fact that at the time the Soviet empire was a larger and more imenent threat and the Islamists were prepaired to fight what we chose to see as proxy wars for us. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Source: The Telegraph Phew! It sure is a good thing that in 1997 they banned handguns and semi-auto long guns! Not correct... Picture of me firing a legal semi automatic long only a couple of weeks ago in the UK. (Although its the Carbine version the full length barrel on this weapon is just as legal.) When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I agree its unacceptable and there should be a response from Israel. However, it should be a proportional response, what is currently taking place is not such a response. Would the world have accepted it if when the IRA kidnapped our soldiers and took them to the Republic of Ireland we (The British) bombed Dublin airport and bomed the civillian population of Ireland. Of course not. This response is as unaceptable as the actions of Hammas and Hisbollah. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Take photos and post them here afterwards When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Oh dear.. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I've been saying this for a while now but people just think I'm having a pop at the US. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

More soldiers or just the same one? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I don't deny any of what you are saying. However, part of it makes me smile, because in every Army all over the world Soldiers say, 'the standards have dropped, its too bloody soft now for recruits, in my day...' (However maybe they are all correct, we live in a namby pamby politicaly correct world, in my day....' When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca