What's new

Craziest man on earth - GUN NUTS - What world has been saying about USA....

mr42O

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
6,178
Reaction score
4
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
What these ppl has been doing for money when it hits USA they are crazy now but when they doing killings in world the are making world safer lol

original.jpg
 
don't know about the guy, but the NRA plan offered is the most down to earth, one i've seen yet. It gets to the point and attempts to address the problem in a relatively cost-effective and reality driven way from the angle it has its own interest in. I could see this as being part of a pronged approach with an overhaul of the mental healthcare system.

It is of course not a perfect plan, but the perfect plan is prohibitively expensive, as always. This at least reduces the potential reaction time from minutes to seconds.
 
So there is not much difference between tribal in Pakistan and Texans in the USA. Both believe in the same this; many sons and many guns.

We Texans love our guns.


**** I'm a Pakistani/Texan.


So, what does that make me? :D
 
Have seen his public speech in BBC last day, specially the part "What stops a bad person with a gun, is a good person with a gun".

What a retard.
Sorry to you, but I agree with him. I drew my pistol only once for all the years I have my concealed carry permit and it was in a possible defensive situation of my mother, my aunt, and my G/F.

The real estate crash hit Nevada pretty hard. One way to make ends meet was for friends and families to share a house and cost. The result is throughout Las Vegas neighborhoods, there are plenty of empty houses and plenty of houses with plenty of people. Another result is that social problems such as parties and personality frictions can easily get out of hand due to so many people living under one roof. One house across the street from us was one such small community. It turned out later that there were 11 Mexicans living in that one house and 6 of them were illegals.

One day, one of the Mexicans living in there got stoned and/or drunk and got kicked out of the house for whatever reasons. We saw the everything from our kitchen window. Then he was standing in the middle of the street, yelling and screaming in Spanish, then he literally started stumbling around the street with his pistol in his hand. It certainly was not a hair dryer in his hand. Our garage door was open and he was less than 50 yards away from our house. The only thing I could do was ushered the ladies into the back bedroom, have them barricade its door, and I ran and grabbed my Steyr M40. Am very good with that piece, even over my Colt 45, which I later sold. Anyway, someone must have called the police because the sirens were already getting closer. The guy then sort of ran and stumbled off somewhere out of my sight.

That was the first time -- outside of the range -- that I ever drew my weapon. Would I shoot? You bet. If he had made it over our garage door threshold, I would have let him have the entire magazine, and I had a spare mag in my back pocket to boot. My G/F in the back bedroom had in her purse a 5-shot .38 S/W revolver or 'wheel gun'. That is the 'last ditch' self defense weapon. Ultra compact and ultra reliable. If a man does not stop after 5 .38 bullets in him, nothing can stop him then.

Whatever goes on inside a person's mind when he has the intention to do harm -- fatal harm -- to someone else, is irrelevant and academic at the moment. The only IMMEDIATE response is to match weapon to weapon. If there was a choice between a 12 gauge shotgun and a pistol, I would have grabbed the shotgun. The issue is not whether the shotgun is a superior weapon or not, but that both shotgun and pistol are weapons and are firearms. And the decision to go for the shotgun because it produces a better spread of projectiles would have been the most intellectual and academic anyone would make.

I do not like the NRA for many reasons and believe it or not, I am not an NRA member. Not because I did not pay my membership dues but just that I never even applied for it. But what LaPierre said is true, that it is the heart of a wielder of a weapon that distinguishes civilization from savagery. I do not care if a man is drunk or sober, or if he had a troubled or proper past, only what is his state of mind and what he intends to do with that weapon. And if he intends to do unjust harm to me and/or my loved ones, then he is a savage and I am the civilized man and I will put him down the best way I know how.

If we post armed guards to protect our money (banks), then why is it so unreasonable to post armed guards to protect our children, the most valuable treasure to our hearts? Which begs the question of why would anyone go after children in the first place. Because he intends to do the most savage harm to civilization as possible. I do not care if he intends to enjoy his savagery afterwards by living, or be dead by his own hands after. Just as money is a sign of a civilized state and deserves our protection, so are our children such a sign and an even greater one at that, and I would rather preempt such an act of savagery than to suffer its consequences.
 
So there is not much difference between tribal in Pakistan and Texans in the USA. Both believe in the same this; many sons and many guns.
Many sons, many guns and many wives. A little bit different! :D

We Texans love our guns.


**** I'm a Pakistani/Texan.


So, what does that make me? :D

A tank! :P
 
Sorry to you, but I agree with him. I drew my pistol only once for all the years I have my concealed carry permit and it was in a possible defensive situation of my mother, my aunt, and my G/F.

The real estate crash hit Nevada pretty hard. One way to make ends meet was for friends and families to share a house and cost. The result is throughout Las Vegas neighborhoods, there are plenty of empty houses and plenty of houses with plenty of people. Another result is that social problems such as parties and personality frictions can easily get out of hand due to so many people living under one roof. One house across the street from us was one such small community. It turned out later that there were 11 Mexicans living in that one house and 6 of them were illegals.

One day, one of the Mexicans living in there got stoned and/or drunk and got kicked out of the house for whatever reasons. We saw the everything from our kitchen window. Then he was standing in the middle of the street, yelling and screaming in Spanish, then he literally started stumbling around the street with his pistol in his hand. It certainly was not a hair dryer in his hand. Our garage door was open and he was less than 50 yards away from our house. The only thing I could do was ushered the ladies into the back bedroom, have them barricade its door, and I ran and grabbed my Steyr M40. Am very good with that piece, even over my Colt 45, which I later sold. Anyway, someone must have called the police because the sirens were already getting closer. The guy then sort of ran and stumbled off somewhere out of my sight.

That was the first time -- outside of the range -- that I ever drew my weapon. Would I shoot? You bet. If he had made it over our garage door threshold, I would have let him have the entire magazine, and I had a spare mag in my back pocket to boot. My G/F in the back bedroom had in her purse a 5-shot .38 S/W revolver or 'wheel gun'. That is the 'last ditch' self defense weapon. Ultra compact and ultra reliable. If a man does not stop after 5 .38 bullets in him, nothing can stop him then.

Whatever goes on inside a person's mind when he has the intention to do harm -- fatal harm -- to someone else, is irrelevant and academic at the moment. The only IMMEDIATE response is to match weapon to weapon. If there was a choice between a 12 gauge shotgun and a pistol, I would have grabbed the shotgun. The issue is not whether the shotgun is a superior weapon or not, but that both shotgun and pistol are weapons and are firearms. And the decision to go for the shotgun because it produces a better spread of projectiles would have been the most intellectual and academic anyone would make.

I do not like the NRA for many reasons and believe it or not, I am not an NRA member. Not because I did not pay my membership dues but just that I never even applied for it. But what LaPierre said is true, that it is the heart of a wielder of a weapon that distinguishes civilization from savagery. I do not care if a man is drunk or sober, or if he had a troubled or proper past, only what is his state of mind and what he intends to do with that weapon. And if he intends to do unjust harm to me and/or my loved ones, then he is a savage and I am the civilized man and I will put him down the best way I know how.

If we post armed guards to protect our money (banks), then why is it so unreasonable to post armed guards to protect our children, the most valuable treasure to our hearts? Which begs the question of why would anyone go after children in the first place. Because he intends to do the most savage harm to civilization as possible. I do not care if he intends to enjoy his savagery afterwards by living, or be dead by his own hands after. Just as money is a sign of a civilized state and deserves our protection, so are our children such a sign and an even greater one at that, and I would rather preempt such an act of savagery than to suffer its consequences.

First post of yours that ever made sense.
 
people need to start wake up and smell the coffee.

Gun nuts and general population with firearms are two very different category.

Some people collect stone, some people collect stamp, some people collect guns. That's just the way it is, granted, even for me, people with more than 10 firearms in his procession seems unrealistic and useless. But that does not mean people have 10 firearms or more are more dangerous than anyone with 3 or less to the society.

Weapon, firearms are a tools, which the 2nd Amendment right make us able to purchase and use them. People do use them responsibily. And i do have been in situation where i need to shoot people in anger, in or out of battle field.

Weapon crime and firearms related crime is not a rare breed only happen in America, nor do American have the laxiest gun law in the world. Why would people keepputting American + Gun = Bad in the equation?

I lived in Sweden, America, Australia and Hong Kong. the former 2 is gun liberal country, the last 2 is gun controlled country. I do see friearms related crime ikn all 4 country. This is not because of partcular place, this is because of particular people. If you are going to commit a crime using firearm, whether you are in a gun liberal or gun controlled country, you would have ways to do it. It's that simple.

You can hate, guns, you can hate gun crime, but i fail to see why people "Specifically" hate gun culture in the US. This is something really bother me here and overseas forum.
 
people need to start wake up and smell the coffee.

Gun nuts and general population with firearms are two very different category.

Some people collect stone, some people collect stamp, some people collect guns. That's just the way it is, granted, even for me, people with more than 10 firearms in his procession seems unrealistic and useless. But that does not mean people have 10 firearms or more are more dangerous than anyone with 3 or less to the society.

Weapon, firearms are a tools, which the 2nd Amendment right make us able to purchase and use them. People do use them responsibily. And i do have been in situation where i need to shoot people in anger, in or out of battle field.

Weapon crime and firearms related crime is not a rare breed only happen in America, nor do American have the laxiest gun law in the world. Why would people keepputting American + Gun = Bad in the equation?

I lived in Sweden, America, Australia and Hong Kong. the former 2 is gun liberal country, the last 2 is gun controlled country. I do see friearms related crime ikn all 4 country. This is not because of partcular place, this is because of particular people. If you are going to commit a crime using firearm, whether you are in a gun liberal or gun controlled country, you would have ways to do it. It's that simple.

You can hate, guns, you can hate gun crime, but i fail to see why people "Specifically" hate gun culture in the US. This is something really bother me here and overseas forum.
The intention here is to be intellectually dishonest when it comes to the US by making an issue to be as uniquely America as possible. If not possible then exaggerate the effects of said issue. It is not as if there is not a 'gun culture' in Pakistan.
 
The intention here is to be intellectually dishonest when it comes to the US by making an issue to be as uniquely America as possible. If not possible then exaggerate the effects of said issue. It is not as if there is not a 'gun culture' in Pakistan.

as i said in some other thread, people don't hate American Gun culture, people hate America.

Gun culture are everywhere. Even gun controlled country have gun culture, gun culture is not something exclusive to America, nor does gun crime. It's just low on my account if they resort to this kind of topic to degrade america. people do died from it.
 
Sorry to you, but I agree with him. I drew my pistol only once for all the years I have my concealed carry permit and it was in a possible defensive situation of my mother, my aunt, and my G/F.

The real estate crash hit Nevada pretty hard. One way to make ends meet was for friends and families to share a house and cost. The result is throughout Las Vegas neighborhoods, there are plenty of empty houses and plenty of houses with plenty of people. Another result is that social problems such as parties and personality frictions can easily get out of hand due to so many people living under one roof. One house across the street from us was one such small community. It turned out later that there were 11 Mexicans living in that one house and 6 of them were illegals.

One day, one of the Mexicans living in there got stoned and/or drunk and got kicked out of the house for whatever reasons. We saw the everything from our kitchen window. Then he was standing in the middle of the street, yelling and screaming in Spanish, then he literally started stumbling around the street with his pistol in his hand. It certainly was not a hair dryer in his hand. Our garage door was open and he was less than 50 yards away from our house. The only thing I could do was ushered the ladies into the back bedroom, have them barricade its door, and I ran and grabbed my Steyr M40. Am very good with that piece, even over my Colt 45, which I later sold. Anyway, someone must have called the police because the sirens were already getting closer. The guy then sort of ran and stumbled off somewhere out of my sight.

That was the first time -- outside of the range -- that I ever drew my weapon. Would I shoot? You bet. If he had made it over our garage door threshold, I would have let him have the entire magazine, and I had a spare mag in my back pocket to boot. My G/F in the back bedroom had in her purse a 5-shot .38 S/W revolver or 'wheel gun'. That is the 'last ditch' self defense weapon. Ultra compact and ultra reliable. If a man does not stop after 5 .38 bullets in him, nothing can stop him then.

Whatever goes on inside a person's mind when he has the intention to do harm -- fatal harm -- to someone else, is irrelevant and academic at the moment. The only IMMEDIATE response is to match weapon to weapon. If there was a choice between a 12 gauge shotgun and a pistol, I would have grabbed the shotgun. The issue is not whether the shotgun is a superior weapon or not, but that both shotgun and pistol are weapons and are firearms. And the decision to go for the shotgun because it produces a better spread of projectiles would have been the most intellectual and academic anyone would make.

I do not like the NRA for many reasons and believe it or not, I am not an NRA member. Not because I did not pay my membership dues but just that I never even applied for it. But what LaPierre said is true, that it is the heart of a wielder of a weapon that distinguishes civilization from savagery. I do not care if a man is drunk or sober, or if he had a troubled or proper past, only what is his state of mind and what he intends to do with that weapon. And if he intends to do unjust harm to me and/or my loved ones, then he is a savage and I am the civilized man and I will put him down the best way I know how.

If we post armed guards to protect our money (banks), then why is it so unreasonable to post armed guards to protect our children, the most valuable treasure to our hearts? Which begs the question of why would anyone go after children in the first place. Because he intends to do the most savage harm to civilization as possible. I do not care if he intends to enjoy his savagery afterwards by living, or be dead by his own hands after. Just as money is a sign of a civilized state and deserves our protection, so are our children such a sign and an even greater one at that, and I would rather preempt such an act of savagery than to suffer its consequences.

Question: How did the other guy got the gun in the first place? Isn't it because of the same lax gun laws?
The reason why we've armed guards at banks or at other sensitive public places is to stop armed criminals.
No one can guarantee about the human nature. You can never know when the "good" guy turns into a "bad" guy. The problem with free gun laws like those in America is when the good guy turns bad he can turn him-self into a killing machine very easily.
In both the Aurora and Sandyhook shootings, the killers were wearing bullet-proof vests which I believe can stop the bullets from your normal concealed guns? So, the only possible way to kill people like these is to equip every one with high power assault rifles effectively turning your country into a war zone.
 
Back
Top Bottom