Lost Dutchman Gold Mine - Arizona Superstition Mountain Wilderness - Gold Mining

"the welsh are weird regardless" now a welshman might say "that coming from an american is a compliment" i hasten to say MIGHT cos im not welsh and therefore wouldnt know- not for sure anyway. he he he

Don,

Don't hold it against TC if he uses the term "Wetback". Unless you have spent much time near the US-Mexican Border, you'll never understand what those who do go through.

I don't use the term myself, but I don't have a problem with others who do.

95% of EVERY outstanding murder warrant in Los Angeles is for an illegal Mexican Immigrant that fled back to Mexico after commiting their crime.

I stopped counting the number of Hospital Emergency Rooms in the SoCal area that have closed down because the illegals use them as free clinics. If you went to an emergency room with a real emergency, you would have to wait 6-7 hours to be seen behind people who don't speak English that are there for bad colds and the like. They don't have medical insurance, so they go to the emergency room because they are required by law to be treated there. And don't give me that crap about free healthcare, because they are not citizens, and are here illegally, they wouldn't qualify for free healthcare even if we had it.

The children of illegal aliens cost the state about $9000 per child in our overcrowded public schools. Currently, 60% of those same children drop out of school (after we have wasted all that time and money on them). Those same drop out kids wind up in gangs and cost our taxpayers more money when they go on welfare and even worse, when they get put in jail.

So, don't think less of somebody who is fed up with everything that is happening because of the illegal immigrants, and our governments' lack of action in doing anything about it.

Mike

Don,

If the large number and availability of guns in America is the reason for the number of gun homicides, how do you explain the two countries with some of the lowest murders by guns in the world? That would be Israel
and Switzerland.

While you are considering the "facts", you might also consider what the CDC considers a gun homicide. That would be anyone killed with a gun.

Lots of information out there, not so many people willing to educate themselves. "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with the facts".

Take care,

Joe

Preach on Mike, preach on!!!

Gentlemen: When I was a sibling, (obnoxcious brat, similar to Gollum) We all had firearms. I received a S&W .38 and a winchester 30 30 for my 13 th birthday, Most of my aquaintances also had firearms. Even, horrors, had rifle teams in school. Everyone that wished, had firearms. I was able to enter a store, purchase a pistol, and walk out with no problems. Imagine, I could even order firerams and ammunition by postal service, sheesh.

HOWEVER, in conrast to today, there were no drive by shootings, no school shootouts, not too many holdups snce the clerks were also armed, very few firearm accicdents since we were well aware of safety. I could go on and on, but it would soon get tiresome.

SO, why is there such a difference today? Simple, people have tried to be too undestanding and excuse outrageous anti-social behavior as a product of their enviorment, never the fault of the perpatrator. It isn't their fault, but societies. We excuse everythiing in this guise to the point that a cirminal has no reasonable fear of being held accountable for his acts.

If we had gotten out of line, we had our little butts whopped, now parents go to jail to for attempting to teach them how to live in society, or to learn what "NO" means.

I recently read that in Brtland that taking a violent criminal's life in self defense, no matter how it was acheived or under what crcumstances, is
no longer a viable legal defense. What message does that send to the underworld?

Why in the 30's and 40' was a Bobby able to apprehend a violent criminal with no fierarms, many times with just "come along now' , but today they are increasingly being armed? And this wth a much stricter firearm laws, which means less available frearms? Ah, could it be that only the law abiding citizen, not the cirminal, obeys the law? This obviouly means that any law is ineffectve IF it is aimed at the criminal.

In essence what I am tyng to say is that firearms are not the problem, never were, but society is! We are trying to be too understanding, and civilized!

p.s. Why is it that the miitary, which is saturated with lethal weapons of all types, has practically a zero crime or assault rate?

p.p.s Never forget that after Dunkirk Britiland was effectively defenseless snce she had lost her arsenal at Dunkirk. So, American sportsmen donated 1000,s of firearms for her defense. Since Britland had disarmed her citizens they had nothing to fall back on.

Tropical Tramp

realde, i gotta say i agree with what you say, in the most part ,except for your belief that...."society is the problem, firearms never were"......if we agree that society is the problem(for a multitude of reasons), then isnt arming societys citizens compounding the problem? only allow law abiding citizens the right to bear arms? thats fine ,but how do you define "law abiding".....the people who havent got a criminal record? that means very little,maybe theyve never been caught? the clever ones rarely are.if guns are freely available in any society then it is inevitavble that some will find their way into rthe wrong hands,and the more that are available, then the danger increases.
again you repeat this silly nonsense that in britain a citizen cannot ake a violent criminals life in self defense.....the truth is, if its self defense, if its reasonable self defense....then he or she can.
(quote}(
p.p.s Never forget that after Dunkirk Britiland was effectively defenseless snce she had lost her arsenal at Dunkirk. So, American sportsmen donated 1000,s of firearms for her defense. Since Britland had disarmed her citizens they had nothing to fall back on.

(quote)
to begin with britain did not disarm her citizens ,as british citizens were not routinely armed to begin with.and again britain did not lose her whole arsenal at dunkirk either,and was not defenceless under equipped maybe, but its not the same thing at all......its a silly exaggeration.
your main point about society i agree with, but if we accept that society has changed,then surely that dictates that other things(gun control being only one) have to be changed also.
and as a rather outlandish example, if more guns mean by definition a better society, the n maybe iraq should be the most peaceful place on earth?
if society keeps heaping "logs "on the fire, then we cant really be astonished if the "fire" burns brighter and lasts longer .
regards