XPost: uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns, aus.politics   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: SaPeIsMa@gmail.com   
      
   "Dechucka"  wrote in message   
   news:Hc2dnaFYS4CWwsfMnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@westnet.com.au...   
   >   
   >  wrote in message   
   > news:8fckl896kma3pgt2merngcrlcrnf2njp1p@4ax.com...   
   >> On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 08:50:37 +1100, "Dechucka"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> wrote in message   
   >>>news:sshgl89t7qtihmu8v59ianojcgefn0667s@4ax.com...   
   >>>> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 23:50:30 +1000, F Murtz    
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>ozarkheart@yahoo.com wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 20:30:50 -0700 (PDT), bringyagrogalong   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> ozarkhe...@yahoo.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> "yaputya"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Here's somethingh the gun-nuts won't want to see....   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Shields told host Judy Woodruff, "You know, Judy, the reality   
   >>>>>>>>> is --   
   >>>>>>>>> and it's a terrible reality -- since Robert Kennedy died in the   
   >>>>>>>>> Ambassador Hotel on June 4, 1968, more Americans have died from   
   >>>>>>>>> gunfire than died in . all the wars of this country's history,   
   >>>>>>>>> from   
   >>>>>>>>> the Revolutionary through the Civil War, World War I, World War   
   >>>>>>>>> II,   
   >>>>>>>>> in those 43 years. ... I mean, guns are a problem. And I think   
   >>>>>>>>> they still have to be confronted."   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Is that counting the unarmed people that died at the hands of   
   >>>>>>>> governments led by Stalin? Hitler? Mao? In Cambodia? In Africa?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And what difference would it have made if they were armed, you dull-   
   >>>>>>> witted gimp?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Probably a lot in those days,but not now with modern armoury   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That is open to debate. But you made the point - probably a lot in   
   >>>> those days.   
   >>>   
   >>>but not today   
   >>   
   >> Why not?   
   >   
   > you against a Abrahams Tank (?)  ?   
      
      
      
   Only an idiot like you imagines that an anyone would be stupid to try to   
   face down an Abrahams Tank (sic) with a rifle.   
          
   There are better ways to do take out a tank, even an Abrams   
      
   And then, there's the silliness of the military sending out an Abrams   
   against individuals.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)