also if your gun laws are so dam great why do 50,000 people die and of that 15,000 are dam kids . when your country has the death rate like ours than you can tell your B/s and people mite listen untill then grow up

True

---

also if your gun laws are so dam great why do 50,000 people die and of that 15,000 are dam kids . when your country has the death rate like ours than you can tell your B/s and people mite listen untill then grow up

mO Funny Stuff dere Matey.

GOoD WOrk.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Recently a young girl was given a automatic military weapon . She was way to young to even hold the thing .

But that did not stop the irresponsible parents from stopping her from using it and the man showing her is now dead when 1 of the bullet went into his head .

So i ask is it evil to give a child that young that type of weapon ?

That poor girl will have problems for the rest of her life as she now has to carry the guilt that she shot someone for nothing , just to have the thrill of firing a gun !!!

I think the parents should have been charged with manslaughter at the very least .
manslaughter does not all ways mean a jail sentence . A good behavior bond and a big fine should have been the least that should have happened to teach people to be more responsible with guns around children

---

Recently a young girl was given a automatic military weapon . She was way to young to even hold the thing .

But that did not stop the irresponsible parents from stopping her from using it and the man showing her is now dead when 1 of the bullet went into his head .

So i ask is it evil to give a child that young that type of weapon ?

That poor girl will have problems for the rest of her life as she now has to carry the guilt that she shot someone for nothing , just to have the thrill of firing a gun !!!

I think the parents should have been charged with manslaughter at the very least .
manslaughter does not all ways mean a jail sentence . A good behavior bond and a big fine should have been the least that should have happened to teach people to be more responsible with guns around children

I will respond to your previous post later as time permits, but this one I feel I must comment on now.

I remember that news item from a few days ago. I must agree with you that it was wrong, EVIL, and likely was illegal as well.

I have no clue as to WHY her parents allowed it. I also have NO CLUE why the firearms instructor DID it.

If the firearms instructor had not lost his life, I would say that he should have lost his license, and likely charged with a crime (violation of firearms laws, you know... our Gun Control laws). Possession and use of automatic weapons IS illegal in the USA outside of very restricted and controlled circumstances. For the firearms instructor to have had possession of one means he had to have a Federal license to do so, and they are NOT easy to get. IMO, letting a child fire one should have immediately been grounds for the loss of his Federal license, loss of his State license as a firearms instructor, and possibly other crimes as well (depending on the results).

I am in total agreement that Parents should be held a lot more accountable for the actions of their Children. Not just in this case, but in a great many other types of cases. I am not sure if manslaughter is the appropriate offense, though. Perhaps negligent homicide might be better suited to the circumstances.

Dumb-a$$ parents.... people like that just burn my bu++. I hope that you will be glad to know that not everyone in the USA is like these 2 parents.

When my children were born, I got rid of some of my guns. The ones I did not get rid of, I placed in secure, offsite storage. I don't want my kids touching guns until I am sure they are old enough to handle it. Maybe mid-teens, but I will decide when. Until then, no guns around my kids.

It is a crying shame that more parents don't take the concept of parental responsibility more seriously.

This post of yours I am in pretty much full agreement with.

It is a crying shame that more parents don't take the concept of parental responsibility more seriously.

Don't make any children if you can't take care of them I always say...

If I had known then, what I know now, I would never have become a parent. It's not fair for a child to be born in this crazy world. You can give them a loving home but they have to face all the horrors when a parent isn't able to protect them...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

This post of yours I am in pretty much full agreement with.

Good to here pity there are not more people like you thou.

---

Recently a young girl was given a automatic military weapon . She was way to young to even hold the thing .

But that did not stop the irresponsible parents from stopping her from using it and the man showing her is now dead when 1 of the bullet went into his head .

So i ask is it evil to give a child that young that type of weapon ?

That poor girl will have problems for the rest of her life as she now has to carry the guilt that she shot someone for nothing , just to have the thrill of firing a gun !!!

I think the parents should have been charged with manslaughter at the very least .
manslaughter does not all ways mean a jail sentence . A good behavior bond and a big fine should have been the least that should have happened to teach people to be more responsible with guns around children

In civilized countries its called gross negligence and violation of Arms laws!
Both acts are criminal in our country and means a jail sentence!
Big fines are not paid in our country for obvious reasons.

I think you will find slavery was not banned until the English defeated Napoleon

Glenn,
Please understand History.
You will find that The British Promoted Slavery. They decided to get richer on Southern Slave State's Slavery. By buying more, and more, Slave Cotton. Thereby promoting more, and more Slavery, just to line their pockets.
Did the British Political, and Mercantile Classes, BAN Importing Cotton produced by Evil Slavery? No. Why not?
Did The British attempt to Stop Evil Slavery? No. They just wanted to make more money. In fact, The British were debating assisting The Southern Slave States, during The American Civil War.
What made the defeat of the Southern Army, at the Battle of Gettysburg important: Was that The British determined that The South may lose. Thereafter, they decided not to help The Slave States.

It was/is called Triangular Trade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_trade
Even Sweden was guilty of this in the late 18th centurary.

History! Well only exactly 100 years ago in Europe.

This is an English language film (made in America) adapted from a novel by German author Erich Maria Remarque. The film follows a group of German schoolboys, talked into enlisting at the beginning of World War 1 by their jingoistic teacher. The story is told entirely through the experiences of the young German

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiObc2XmVqw

Clyde i'm shore your right there would have been some Lords and snooty noose gits whom would have wanted to keep slavery .
Debating and doing are 2 different things thou .
I also suspect that they would have also thought about the war they lost Called the American war of independence and would have played into the decision

---

Clyde i'm shore your right there would have been some Lords and snooty noose gits whom would have wanted to keep slavery .
Debating and doing are 2 different things thou .
I also suspect that they would have also thought about the war they lost Called the American war of independence and would have played into the decision

Debating?
All countries was/is slavetraders.
Even in Africa.
So whats the point? All countries are evil. (politicians and bankers)
Perhaps. but are humans born evil?

Clyde i did say that they would have thought about what happened last time they interfered in America . Your war for independence which if my memory is correct they the pom's LOST but let's face it thinking or debating are different to doing , it's called "democracy" witch i'm shore you do understand right

And is a bit rich seeing as so many things are now made in China and they have such a good industrial record and pay there worker good money right .And yet there COMMIES and you do business with them after all the B/S of red's under the beds ......

And before you say it yes our D&*(head polly's just follow'd your D^&*head polly's .We did not go around to other country's saying you can't do business with them commies .but i think your's did and even threaten sanctions for those that did wish to do business .

This debate is making America look very EVIL ........

---

Clyde i'm shore your right there would have been some Lords and snooty noose gits whom would have wanted to keep slavery .
Debating and doing are 2 different things thou .
I also suspect that they would have also thought about the war they lost Called the American war of independence and would have played into the decision

Debating?
All countries was/is slavetraders.
Even in Africa.
So whats the point? All countries are evil. (politicians and bankers)
Perhaps. but are humans born evil?

janneseti...
Just replying to Glenn's Post of:

Your system is more based on the French system witch which allow'd Napoleon to come to power. There system did not evolve like the Westminster system did .And do i have to remind you that Napoleon was a dictator .
I think you will find slavery was not banned until the English defeated Napoleon so i am not surprised really that what happened in your country happened .

As if what happed in my Country was worse than Britain.

The French system? All western countries has copied there constitution.
Benjamin Franklin was one. Sweden as well...
Im not sure about Britian (Australia).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4K1q9Ntcr5g
Anybody knows about the field marshal Jean Baptist Bernadotte from the Napolean Wars?

No Jan England and Australia come under the Westminster system look up the Magna Carta and Oliver Cromwell to see what i mean.

---

No Jan England and Australia come under the Westminster system look up the Magna Carta and Oliver Cromwell to see what i mean.

Magna Carta:)
No No No.
That's Before Australia was known. Prince John and Robin Hood!
Oliver Cromwell from the 17th Century!
Read Your history books Glenn

James Cook 'found' Australia in the late 18th Century.
Sidney I believe.

Cheers mate

Yes but we are under the British system mate witch started with the magna Carta and Oliver cromwell

The Queen of England can and has sacked our PM's look up Gough Whitlam
1975
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

Bloody pom's

---

Yes but we are under the British system mate witch started with the magna Carta and Oliver cromwell

The Queen of England can and has sacked our PM's look up Gough Whitlam
1975
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

Bloody pom's

I forgot about the Commonwealth;)

Gough Whitlam was dismissed by Governer-general Sir John Kerr, not by the Queen.

I know he acted as the Queen's representative, but they're recommended for appointment by the Prime Minister of Australia, in this case by Gough Whitlam the year previously.

The 1975 constitutional crisis was an entirely Australia-centric affair.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Gough Whitlam was dismissed by Governer-general Sir John Kerr, not by the Queen.

I know he acted as the Queen's representative, but they're recommended for appointment by the Prime Minister of Australia, in this case by Gough Whitlam the year previously.

The 1975 constitutional crisis was an entirely Australia-centric affair.

Does the Queen of Britain still have political Power?
Our King doesn't. 100 years ago since Kings and Queens had that.

Does the Queen of Britain still have political Power?
Our King doesn't. 100 years ago since Kings and Queens had that.

In theory, the Queen has the ultimate authority over parliament, in practice she doesn't use it.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.