If you love Paintball....

[Ole Unka Phil]

Conservative Rocker Ted Nugent on Hunting:

Nugent, an avid hunter, was being interviewed by a French journalist. The journalist asked, "What do you think the last thought is in the mind of a deer before you shoot it? Is it, "Are you my friend?" or is it "Are you the one who killed my brother?"

Nugent replied, "Deer aren't capable of that kind of thinking. All they care about is, 'What am I going to eat next, who am I going to screw next, and can I run fast enough to get away. They are very much like the French."

[Altimas]

LMAO!!! OMG!!! That is the funnies thing I have read in months!!

[Ole Unka Phil]

Ted Kennedy & Osama

After numerous rounds of "We don't know if Osama is still alive," Osama himself decided to send Ted Kennedy a note in his own handwriting to let him know he was still in the game. Kennedy opened the note, which appeared to contain a single line of coded message: 370HSSV-0773H.

Kennedy was baffled, so he E-mailed it to John Kerry. Kerry and his aides had no clue either, so they sent it to the FBI. No one could solve it at the FBI, so it went to the CIA, then to the NSA. With no clue as to its meaning, the FBI finally asked Marine Corps Intelligence for help.

Within a few seconds, the Marines cabled back with this reply: "Tell Kennedy he is holding the message upside down."

[SCpoloRicker]

Cause you're definately pro-gay aren't you!!!

Actually...

/not sure what "pro-gay" entails exactly?
//I bet it's fabulous, though

#3) Avoid topics containing religious, racial, or political discussion (they are the top three flame starting toipcs)

Duh, that only applies to LIEburals.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Could you two please contribute to the subject at hand?

FACTS TO PONDER :

(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is

700,000 .

(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians

per year are

120,000 .

(Calculation) Accidental deaths per physician

is

0.171

Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of

Health Human Services.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now think about this:

Guns:

(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S.

is

80,000,000.

(Yes, that's 80 million..)

(B) The number of accidental gun deaths

per year, all age groups,

is

1,500 .


(Calculation) The number of accidental deaths

per gun owner

is

.000188

Statistics courtesy of FBI


Lets use statistics to prove something! YaY! What does that prove? Not much... but is interesting ain't it?

[SCpoloRicker]

Are you interested in fisking those numbers?

[Ole Unka Phil]

[PyRo]

His post, in theory is correct, yet in actuality it is wrong. The gov't has twisted the constitution so much throughout the years that in it's current state, it no longer reflects it's origins. Take Lincoln for example. During the War Between the States (Another topic, a civil war is when one side tries to overthrow the gov't, the South wanted to leave, not overthrow) Lincoln blatently suspended Habeus Corpus, he censored the media for criticizing his actions to the point where he exiled the editor. This was during war time but it is a clear example of how the Constitution, in theory, protects the citizens but in the end it is nothing more than a piece of old paper.

The Constitution specifically allows for the suspension of Habeus Corpus during time of war.
If you want to make arguments about the War of Northern Aggression or whatever you would like to call it, one could argue that the South had the right to secede. The constitution nowhere makes any mention that statehood can not be undone and grants all powers not listed in the constitution to the state.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Here is an interesting tidbit....

How can a News organization hire someone to supposedly do impartial stories when they purposely hire a person so partial to one side of an issue to be their investigative reporter? Apparently they have already chosen a side on this issue and just need someone to take that side for them! A real good reason to not watch any more ABC. This guy they have hired is an idiot. With no real knowledge base of the issue. He is a rabid paid "anti" who's only claim to fame is being a real prick. He is clearly not a "Firearms Expert" nor a Firearms issues expert". He is clearly an Anit firearms for any purpose advocate. Do we really want our reporting on issues to come with a predetermined purpose? Or do we just want the facts? Well... you can count on NOT getting any facts that don't suppport this guys agenda nor ABC's. Because they purposefully have not listed his past work with Handgun Control so you won't realize how biased they really are!

Read this article by Tim Inwood, and contact ABC about it if you wish. I know I will.

By Tim Inwood

As many gun owners are aware, the United Nations is starting their Small Arms and Light Weapons conference in New York City this June. This is yet another assault on our gun rights but, for a change, it is not being launched from Washington D.C. or a state capitol. This conference is part of a global effort to take your guns, and it is gaining momentum.

So while the UN sits down in June to do this, Second Amendment defenders will be watching....but who will Americans be watching to report the facts to us? An unbiased reporter who will give it to us straight? Unless you are watching Fox News, probably not. Most especially not if you are watching ABC. That's because the American Broadcasting Corporation added former Salon.com reporter Jake Tapper to their line-up in July 2003, and has been using him to cover firearms-related stories.

Click on 'Read More...' below for the complete story.



Who is Jake Tapper, you ask? Prior to working for Salon.com, Mr. Tapper worked for Handgun Control Inc. - something that ABC leaves out of his bio on the ABC website. Reporters will frequently tell us that whatever their privately held convictions, they don't let that interfere with giving us the straight story. I have no doubt Jake Tapper will say the same if he is challenged about his credibility. However his writing for Salon.com shows that he is yet another anti-gun leftist hack.

In one March 2001 piece he laments "Still no new gun laws in the wake of Paducah, Jonesboro, Springfield, Columbine and now Santee,...Congress hasn't passed a new gun control law since 1996." (as if we need new anti gun laws constantly). This is not reporting, it is advocacy, and Jake Tapper's writings are full of it. (Included at the bottom of this article are links so you can go look at a smattering of his pieces on guns).

Is this what passes for ABC's standards for a qualified reporter? We should not be surprised, I suppose. For as long as I can remember in my 43 years on this Earth I have heard of liberal bias in the news media. They have always denied it, but I can't help but think they enjoy insulting our intelligence since they have been so blatant about it in recent decades. They have given shows to people like Chris Matthews, who wrote speeches for Jimmy Carter and once worked for Tip O'Neil. George Stephanopolis, one of Bill Clinton's high profile top aids replaced David Brinkley (shoes little George can hardly fill). Tim Russert was chief of staff for anti-gun Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Katrina Vandenhoovel at CBS was a high ranking aide to Hillary Clinton....but we are told we can expect the networks and CNN, CNBC and MSNBC to cover issues fairly. Uhm, right. By their standards you might as well assign Bill Clinton to cover VFW conventions and a Satanist to do the Vatican beat. I might even suggest ABC hire Rosie O'Donnel to help Mr. Tapper with his stories aimed at the NRA, the UN is a big place after all.

So if you see Jake Tapper this summer standing before the UN smiling and nodding while telling us for our own good we need to eradicate the 650 million firearms privately held in private hands, and how the UN is right in doing this, remember that his mind was made up before he arrived.

Tim Inwood is the current Legislative Liaison and Past President of the Clinton County Farmers and Sportsmen Association, and a volunteer for Buckeye Firearms Association.

[wjr]

^^^ It's not as if ABC is the only biased network. All networks are biased somewhat, and some (way) more so then others. But yes, I can agree with you. Many networks are distorting the truth and showing only one side of it.

Edit: I love this part:

For as long as I can remember in my 43 years on this Earth I have heard of liberal bias in the news media.

(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is

700,000 .

(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians

per year are

120,000 .

(Calculation) Accidental deaths per physician

is

0.171

Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of

Health Human Services.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now think about this:

Guns:

(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S.

is

80,000,000.

(Yes, that's 80 million..)

(B) The number of accidental gun deaths

per year, all age groups,

is

1,500 .


(Calculation) The number of accidental deaths

per gun owner

is

.000188

Statistics courtesy of FBI

I'm sorry, but what are you trying to say here? That statistic really proves nothing. Doctors are in situations that could potentially kill people everyday, and are in high stress environments, every day. I would hope this is not the same for gun owners.


Oh yeah, and one thing about the constitution. When it says "right to bear arms", it could mean the "right to have weapons in a time of war". And this isn't just something I thought of , people more learned then myself agree. Of course that was all changed in 2001 when the court of appeals said this:

"there are numerous instances of the phrase 'bear arms' being used to describe a civilian's carrying of arms. Early constitutional provisions or declarations of rights in at least some ten different states speak of the right of the 'people' [or 'citizen' or 'citizens'] "to bear arms in defense of themselves [or 'himself'] and the state,' or equivalent words, thus indisputably reflecting that under common usage 'bear arms' was in no sense restricted to bearing arms in military service."


Anyways, my point is, mabye our forefathers didn't actually intend for us to have guns at all!

[hitech]

Oh yeah, and one thing about the constitution. When it says "right to bear arms", it could mean the "right to have weapons in a time of war". And this isn't just something I thought of , people more learned then myself agree. Of course that was all changed in 2001 when the court of appeals said this:

"there are numerous instances of the phrase 'bear arms' being used to describe a civilian's carrying of arms. Early constitutional provisions or declarations of rights in at least some ten different states speak of the right of the 'people' [or 'citizen' or 'citizens'] "to bear arms in defense of themselves [or 'himself'] and the state,' or equivalent words, thus indisputably reflecting that under common usage 'bear arms' was in no sense restricted to bearing arms in military service."


Anyways, my point is, mabye our forefathers didn't actually intend for us to have guns at all!

Where do you get that opinion from? You quote something that contradicts you. The second amendment is very clear. All you have to do is understand what a well trained militia was back then. You can argue whether we should have that right, but it is clearly spelled out in the constitution.

[Ole Unka Phil]

wjr,

You clearly have not read any of the Articles of the federation and Bill of Rights. (the precursors to the Constitution) nor any of the deliberations on the writing of the Constitution if you do not know that the right was extended and specificaly intended for each person to be armed and bear arms. The intent was to make sure EACH PERSON was allowed to be armed so that the Government could not become tyranical. That was its initial purpose. It was to keep the government in check. That was its primary purpose. It is specificaly spelled out what it means in numerous documents preceeding the final wording. And forefathers had the foresight to write it all down. Least someone like you were to attempt to reinterpret it wrongly. Which is often the case over the years.

The aguments now are "well those days are in the past"... or "we don't need it now so all the reinterpretations are no longer valid". But... are they? The original intent mayhaps was a great one. If we ever could get back to it. One of the first things a Government does to enslave its people is to dissarm it. Many say "well it folly to think you could stand up to the government if you ever needed to:. But is that not the point? At least you could try? And is that not exactly what our forefathers did? They stood up to thier tyranical government and won. And they intended for us, many years later, to also be empowered to do so if need be. They gave us a framework to do it by peacefull means. However they intended to reserve all options for us. Very smart they were. We have chipped away at it for decades now. And are about to lose it I fear.

As to those statistics... did you not read anything I said before that? I said that "You can pull statistics out and make them as you wish". That was an example of two totaly different sets of statisitcs (and real ones) that show that Doctors kill more people than guns. Far more. What does it mean? Nothing. As I said before... try reading some of the thread before you go off half cocked eh?

Here is another read for you:

http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070212/NEWS/702120322/1011

And... post on an internet forum about Concealed Carry issues:

Society fears murders. Society erects signs abolishing murders. Murderers ignore signs, committing crime despite the beautiful signs. Society erects more signs.

Doesn't seem to be working.

How it could be ...

Society fears murders. Society erects laws acknowledging right to self-defense. Murderers ignore "signs." Citizens defend against murderers directly and permanently. Murderers fear civilians. Society saves money on signs.
__________________

[hitech]

www.atf.gov/firearms/stats/index.htm).

2. FBI, Crime in the United States 2005 (www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/) and BJS (http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/).

3. See www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars or wonder.cdc.gov.

4. Available at www.nsc.org/.

5. See www.nraila.org/Issues .

6. For more on NRA training programs, visit www.nrahq.orgwww.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=21www.atf.gov/firearms/ycgii/1999/index.htm).

2. National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press, 2005.

3. BATF, "Firearms Commerce in the United States 2001/2002" (www.atf.gov/pub/index.htm#Firearms).

4. BJS, "Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2004" (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov./bjs/pub/pdf/bcft04.pdf).

5. FBI, "NICS Operations 2005," Jan. 2006 (https://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/op...2005.htm#page4)

6. Bureau of the Census (http://www.census.gov/popest/states/...ST2005-01.xls).

7. Gary Kleck, Targeting Firearms, Aldine de Gruyter, 1997, pp. 94, 98-100.

8. E.g., BJS Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 2002, Table 2.58, (www.albany.edu/sourcebook/).

9. See NRA RTC fact sheet (within www.nraila.org/Issues/Filter.aspx?ID=003).

10. FBI, Crime in the United States 2005 (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/d...ts/05tbl05.xls) for state crime statistics.

11. See NRA-ILA Compendium of State Firearms Laws (www.nraila.org/media/misc/compendium.htm). Also, note that in October 2005, federal legislation prohibiting such lawsuits was signed into law.

12. FBI, Crime in the United States 2005, Table 4, (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/d...ts/05tbl04.xls) and BJS (http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/).

13. Ibid. Condensed at www.nraila.org, click on "Research," then "Crime Statistics."

14. BJS, "Criminal Victimization 2005," (www.ojp.usdoj.gov./bjs/pub/pdf/cv05.pdf).

15. Federal "assault weapon" ban: Roth, Koper, et al., Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, March 13, 1997 (www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=406797); Reedy and Koper, "Impact of handgun types on gun assault outcomes: a comparison of gun assaults involving semiautomatic pistols and revolvers," Injury Prevention 2003, (http://ip.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/9/2/151); Koper et al., Report to the National Institute of Justice, An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003, June 2004 (https://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/j...aw_final.pdf); Wm. J. Krouse, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "Semiautomatic Assault Weapons Ban," Dec. 16, 2004. "Gun control," generally: Library of Congress, Report for Congress: Firearms Regulations in Various Foreign Countries, May 1998, LL98-3, 97-2010; Task Force on Community Preventive Service, "First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws," Morbidity and Mortaility Weekly Report, Oct. 3, 2003 (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmw...rr5214a2.htm); National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press, 2005 (http://books.nap.edu/books/0309091241/html/index.html).

[Phillips]

... and shooting sports and the right to protect yourself....

Time to wake up an vote people. This list includes paintball markers. Eventually. Our friends in England and Austrailia can tell you this sort of thing creaps up on you and eventualy strangles you while your not watching. These people that propose this sort of thing intend to make you subservient to your Governement because they ARE the Government and they don't think your smart enough to deal with these sorts of things on your own. Plus, they need to disarm you in order to control you. And they could care less if you are left defensless because THEY get to keep thier guns and body gaurds. Wake up. A new threat is coming. Criminals don't care about laws. These laws will apply only to YOU. And only if you let them do it. Vote for candidates that support your right to defend yourself. No matter what party they are.


This is a list circulated around some years back and its about to be dusted back off. This is Clinton Era stuff that was compliled as a target. It is designed to errode slowly into finality of removing your right to own firearms. Of all types. See the very bottom... Paintball is on the list...

THE FIVE YEAR PLAN:

1. National Licensing of all handgun purchases.

2. Licenses for Rifle and Shotgun owners.

3. State Licenses for ownership of firearms.

4. Arsenal Licenses (5 guns and 250 rounds of ammunition).

5. Arsenal License Fees (at least $300.00, with a cap of $1,000.00).

6. Limits on Arsenal Licensing (None in counties with populations of
more than 200,000).

7. Requirement of Federally Approved Storage Safes for all guns.

8. Inspection License. (Gun safe licenses, yearly fee for spot
inspections).

9. Ban on Manufacturing in counties with a population of more than
200,000.

10. Banning all military style firearms.

11. Banning Machine Gun Parts or parts which can be used in a Machine

gun.

12. Banning the carrying a firearm anywhere but home or target range
or in transit from one to the other.

13. Banning replacement parts (manufacturing, sale, possession,
transfer, installation) except barrel, trigger group.

14. Elimination of the Curio Relic list.

15. Control of Ammunition belonging to Certain Surplus Firearms.
(7.62x54R and .303).

16. Eventual Ban of Handgun Possession..

17. Banning of Any ammo that fits military guns (post 1945).

18. Banning of any quantity of smokeless powder or black powder which

would constitute more than the equivalent of 100 rounds of
ammunition.

19. Ban the possession of explosive powders of more than 1 kg. at any

one time.

20. Banning of High Powered Ammo or Wounding ammo.

21. A National License for Ammunition.

22. Banning or strict licensing of all re-loading components.

23. National Registration of ammunition or ammo buyers.

24. Requirements of special storage safe for ammunition and
licensing.

25. Restricting Gun Ranges to counties with populations less than
200,000.

26. Special Licensing of ranges.

27. Special Range Tax to visitors. ($85.00 per visit per person).

28. Waiting period for rentals on pistol ranges.

29. Banning Gun Shows.

30. Banning of military reenactments.

PLUS:

Ban of all clips holding over 6 bullets.

Elimination of the Dept. of Civilian Marksmanship.

Ban on all realistic replica and toy guns (including "air soft" and
paintball).

The right of gun-violence victims to sue, with financial assistance
from government programs, the gun manufacturers.

Taxes on ammo, dealers, guns, licenses to offset medical costs to
society.

The eventual ban on all semi-automatics regardless of when made or
caliber.

I am in England and it's my native country, I WILL NOT tell you that this will creep up on you.
I can quite legally own and shoot just about any firearm I choose, aswell as own all the replica firearms I could wish to own.
Our gun licensing laws are there for protection and do a damn fine job, I do however support the idea to stop undue restrictions.


Firearms do not kill people, it is the socety in which firearms are present that pulls the trigger.
Take Canadian gun crime statistics and compare them to others, they have a relativly low percentages compared to most.
Education and a lack of gun culture makes for a safer place, not the lack of guns.

A good comparison is knife related crimes, in England and Scotland we have a large ammount of knife culture, hence that is the big issue.



p.s. Requirements of special storage safe for ammunition and
licensing, this is in place and is in effect for personal safty, i.e. a gun cabinet stops children ect from harm.
1. National Licensing of all handgun purchases, this helps keep track of the weapons most likly to be used in armed robberys(sp?)

2. Licenses for Rifle and Shotgun owners, this is in effect here and in my opinion it is a great peice of legislation, it keeps track on nearly all gun owners, much like car registration.
Makes it harder for criminals to purchase guns, or atleast notifies the authorities when firearms go missing.

[wjr]

I admit it. I was uninformed. My post was stupid.

I wasn't trying to start something though..