maqroll

Works now, I'm gonna sign up later today

Woodward is like Martin Tyler compared with American MLS announcers...it could be much worse, trust me.

Koeman's questioning why the board are dragging their feet...for that matter, so am I. Surely PF could have put the final stamp on the deal while the team is on tour?

Link doesn't work

The geography of gun violence Decent article...

Maybe, maybe not. How's she doing now? Perhaps she's regretting having killed someone, perhaps she isn't. What if she had been the one to have ended up dead by her own weapon? Would you have been using that as an emotive tale to support being armed? We could "what if" all night long, it doesn't change the fact that by using her firearm, she thwarted a probable rape, and a possible murder. My father lives in a rural part of New England where there has been a scourge of meth/oxycontin abuse and related crimes, particularly home invasion/robberies. My father has a firearm. It gives him some peace of mind, and it gives me some as well.

I know you're not, but it seems that there's no will to change the situation when from the outside the solution is as clear as could be. Just cos something's hard doesn't mean it shouldn't be done and just cos somethings written on a constitution doesn't make it right. Well of course! The debate over this issue has been raging for years in this country. There are countless Americans who support a total ban on firearms, or at least a major overhaul of the laws currently on the books. Every time one of these mass shootings happen, the volume gets turned way up on the debate, but nothing changes because the NRA/ gun lobby is a monster and can make or break a political candidacy all by itself.

Absolutely, but it would still be selfish of me. Do you think the number of 'victims' that've survived as a result of having a gun outweighs the victims that've been killed by a gun? I don't and I doubt even if you multiplied it by 10 that you'd even be close. Now it's there I don't think you can just take it away, certainly not somewhere as huge as the States. This kind of thing (not exactly this kind of thing) will keep on happening though as a result and there is nothing that can stop it. @ your last reply, aren't they more 'military' things though? Defending your borders and a civil war aren't just regular civilians really. That's no different than what Britain has been doing for centuries, we use guns to protect, but that doesn't mean we give them out to everyone who wants one. Many of the Confederate soldiers used their own rifles.

Why? Why do ordinary people need guns? To fight off Europeans? No need to be glib, I was simply providing an historical context for the significance of guns in the US. Why do people need them? Thousands of people hunt game to eat, some people live in rural areas where bears, wolves, coyotes and cougars roam... But sadly, I think most people own weapons because they know how many people out there are armed as well, and might have bad intentions. In my town, several years ago, a woman who lived alone was attacked in her apartment by a guy in a ski mask and a hunting knife. She had a legal handgun, and she used it. Shot him dead. If she was your sister, girlfriend or mother, you'd have been grateful she was armed... Anyway you look at it, the situation sucks, but this country is teeming with firearms, and many of them illegal and in the hands of criminals. Some people take a firearms course, get a permit and buy a handgun to protect themselves, and I can't fault them. It's a **** up, violent country. Well, if you're happy then carry on. I'm NOT happy, I just said the situation sucks.

Absolutely, but it would still be selfish of me. Do you think the number of 'victims' that've survived as a result of having a gun outweighs the victims that've been killed by a gun? I don't and I doubt even if you multiplied it by 10 that you'd even be close. Now it's there I don't think you can just take it away, certainly not somewhere as huge as the States. This kind of thing (not exactly this kind of thing) will keep on happening though as a result and there is nothing that can stop it. You are quite right. My earlier post I said that gun laws need severe restrictions imposed on them. Certain types of weapons and ammo that are currently legal in some states need to be banned outright. Measures can be taken to reduce the number and types of weapons out there, but the political will to do so verges on nil, especially in the traditional "gun culture" states. It's political suicide for a congressman or senator from Texas or Wyoming, etc. to even suggest restrictive measures.

I'm sorry, but going that far back to prove a point is way off target. And back then "us" were probably just a European as Europe. And your last point is very bad, Civil War is not a good example. Going that far back is to provide historical context for the significance of firearms here, full stop. It just means that the culture of gun ownership has been ingrained in Americans as far back as the 1700's.

Why? Why do ordinary people need guns? To fight off Europeans? No need to be glib, I was simply providing an historical context for the significance of guns in the US. Why do people need them? Thousands of people hunt game to eat, some people live in rural areas where bears, wolves, coyotes and cougars roam... But sadly, I think most people own weapons because they know how many people out there are armed as well, and might have bad intentions. In my town, several years ago, a woman who lived alone was attacked in her apartment by a guy in a ski mask and a hunting knife. She had a legal handgun, and she used it. Shot him dead. If she was your sister, girlfriend or mother, you'd have been grateful she was armed... Anyway you look at it, the situation sucks, but this country is teeming with firearms, and many of them illegal and in the hands of criminals. Some people take a firearms course, get a permit and buy a handgun to protect themselves, and I can't fault them. It's a **** up, violent country.

Firearms were what fended off European nations who wanted to control us, and firearms are what cleared the midwest, the plains, and finally the west of the Indians. Our country was founded on the application of gun violence. It was intrinsic to establishing the republic, it was what defeated the South in the civil war, and so the right to bear arms is revered and well protected. I believe in the right to bear arms, but with severe restrictions. No high capacity firearms, no assault rifles, no hollow point bullets, etc. I think the criteria used to assess someone seeking a permit needs to be made much more stringent. Psychological exams and better background checks. Yearly permit renewal, with another round of psych testing. Also a longer waiting period before being able to purchase a weapon, a massive tax on ownership, etc. But even these sensible changes will not happen in every state, especially those states with a strong gun culture.

Living in Massachusetts (very strict gun laws, not a big gun culture), we don't see these types of crimes luckily. But the "mass shooting" has become such a **** American tradition that I've become numb to it all at this point. I'm not surprised anymore. Angry and disgusted, but not surprised...

You aren't

Just watched "Drive"...duped again by the Hollywood Hype Machine. So overrated...

gosh, these American's are a rude bunch, aren't they? . it's because they lost the war of independence :winkold: There's a few 100 year old Boston Brahmins still kicking around who still swear allegiance to the Crown, believe it or not. I think they're waiting for the right moment to attack... There's an area in Cambridge near Harvard called "Tory Row", a long time bastion of Crown kissers...but it's not what it used to be.

How about Nope, too gay.

gosh, these American's are a rude bunch, aren't they? If this has been discussed before, than have the good grace to say so, rather than wheel out a tired VT saying that has long since been and gone. Don't throw us ALL under the bus

Liverpool are training about a 10 minutes drive from where I live. I was thinking about going down there and heckling Stewart Downing...

Opinion? Certainly! My reading of things is that Assad is essentially the leader of a group of minority sects which is far smaller than the majority over which they rule. Democracy for them is therefore unthinkable, and hence the brutality. As a non-Sunni, he has to an extent been propped up by Iran over the years, which helps explain Syria's aggressive stance towards Israel. The reasons, as I see it, for the West not getting too involved up to now are: a) The absence of large oil reserves in Syria and The fact that the West knows what Assad knows, which is that democracy in Syria is likely to equate to Sunni (and quite possibly fundamentalist Sunni) rule, which would put huge pressures on the minorities in Syria and, in the light of developments in Egypt, mean that the Middle East is dominated by governments with Sunni Muslim power bases. The whole business is bad news. Although there's not much to like about Assad's personality (such as it is), in his defence he has run his country along secular lines. Notwithstanding his (arguably justifiable) antaganism towards Israel, he never really put a foot wrong until he started killing huge numbers of his fellow Syrians. The almost inevitable outcome is a Middle East with less cultural and political diversity, and this can't be good in the long run. Good summation. Jews and Christians in Syria are probably shitting it right about now.

Is this all the stuff from their American broadcast site?

It's looking pretty grim for Assad now, with rebels inside Damascus today...top officials are being killed or defecting....The Red Cross are calling it "Civil War". The fear now is that Assad will use his chemical weapons...this could get really ugly.

Um, I think people go because they want to see the events in person, and support their countrymen/women...it IS like the World Cup where you go to support your country. Who else would you support? Yes but can you really imagine 3,000 Australians travelling to watch their swimming team? The Olympics doesn't seem like an event that you would travel away to. I could imagine 3,000 Aussies traveling to England to stay for 10 days and watch many events....

Agree, I'd take him over Carroll in an instant