Bitcoin Forum

Revolting how political filth in the UK let more shit out of their mouth than out of their assholes these days!!!

HOW CAN SCUM WITH KNIVES KILL SO MANY PEOPLE?

Same in Berlin, why did the truck not stop earlier? Thousands getting rapefugeed or robbed each year?

Why? The key issue is not even discussed in mainstream media.

UK AND GERMANY GOT THE STRICTEST GUNLAWS IN THE WORLD.

There were hundreds of people, but it would have taken only ONE person and ONE magazine to take care of the attackers, in minutes. Police needed 8 minutes to send the attackers to Djehennam. But they arrived too late.

These victims were the victims of UK politicians of the likes of Khan and May, just as if they had killed them personally. It is their fucking fault.

Probably, maybe.

What we've seen in the US is that if the Bad Guy thinks that there's one in a hundred of the people in the crowd packing a gun, he seeks some other place for his mayhem. Someplace where zero of a hundred is packing.

Lately I have noticed that the ISIS is targeting the European Union more, with the United States now a low priority. They might have found out that actually it is very easy to commit terrorist attacks in the EU rather than in the US. Millions of Muslims were allowed to enter without any kind of checks.

Even before the "refugees" inflow, US has less total number of muslims (~2.6m) than such countries as UK (~3.1m), Germany (~4m), or France (~5m).
Less muslims = less radical muslims = less attacks

---

In the UK, you can't even carry a butter knife, nevermind the guns. Few years back, there were even a serious talks about banning beer glasses/bottles in public places.

Do police in Europe even have guns with them when they go on patrol. I believe in some terror incidents in the past, there were police but they don't have guns with them. I remember there was also one that got stabbed in France.

To a third worlder like me, police without guns just sound so ridiculous. A bark must be backed with a bite, you can't expect criminals to fear you if they know you're defenseless.


Even before the recent flood of Muslims coming into Europe they pretty much already have plenty of Muslims, mainly due to proximity as well as immigration laws. Many naturalized Muslims were from former colonies, for example the UK have plenty of Pakistanis while France have a lot of North Africans. So even without the sudden increase this past year, ISIS have plenty of possible recruits in there.

The US is overrun with armed nigger gangs and mexicans instead.

Who has killed the most?

Violent crime/murder rate per million people

uk = 11.68  US = 42.01 ( 4X higher)  So why havent your guns reduced the US rate lower than the UK rate?

Stupid.
What would have they done with a gun against a truck?
Why did 0 terrorist attack have been stopped by policemen or soldiers fully armed and trained?

Guns given to people don't help. It might make the matter worse:
After terrorist attacks in Paris, a lightbulb imploded in a bar. It created a panic movement, what would have happened if people had guns?

But how can one say this is the solution?

This is the reason why there are armed guards at every corner patrolling in those countries.

There are plenty of times where armed citizens stopped crimes. They just go unreported in the media because well blood makes news.

As for the lightbulb incident, I guess there would have been many lightbulbs shot out by the bar patrons.. just in case.  :P

Even not all the members of the police force are allowed to have access to a gun whiles we live in an age where terrorism abounds so much, at least the police force should have access to them.

It's the same in Germany, you can't carry a knife. In some countries only spring loaded knives are banned, which is also ridiculous. I think it's still a law in the USA, that you can't carry a spring loaded (automatic) knife, but you can carry a spring assisted knife. For those not interested in knives, there's basically no difference in the size, opening speed and damage you can do between those two types.

I suggest you have a look at the mass shooting tracker (https://www.massshootingtracker.org/data).  In 2015 there were 372 mass shootings, more than one every day, while in the UK, this is such a shocking and unusual occurrence that all UK and even US media outlets were monitoring the victims constantly.

Since the London attack, which killed 8 people as I recall, hundreds of people have died in the US from guns.

It's absolutely appalling that people pretend guns are the way to safety when the "bad guy", is always shooting before the "good guy".

No, lightbulbs are illegal too in EU. But what you wrote is total bullcrap.

The truck in France was stopped...how...?? ROUNDS FIRED BY POLICEMAN

The truck in Berlin was stopped how? AUTOMATIC BRAKE BECAUSE SO MANY DEAD BODIES WERE STUCK UNDERNEATH

Without the autobrake he would have continued all day long. Instead the scum got away and was later killed in Italy, how? ROUNDS FIRED BY POLICE

So the use of ammunition stops bad guys, and if there had been armed citizens in Paris, France or Berlin (like there are in Israel) all the killings would have been stopped very quickly

GUNS CAN SAVE LIVES

9/11

Ok Luls

HOW CAN SCUM WITH KNIVES KILL SO MANY PEOPLE?

Because the had pretend bomb vest on to make you think your getting blew up not STABBED ..
CRAFTY FUCKERS  ..

So most would run ..
If it was just Knives they would of been tackled way before       PLUS they run most over..

So that's how they done it..

JUST PUT THIS IN YOUR BRAINS..You need to know it..

If someone or some peoples are prepared to die and give there lives up
YOU CAN DO NOTHING ABOUT IT..

They do not plan to ESCAPE ..             So always will be DEATH..

So we have just got to hope we get them before they get us OR lower the death rate ..
Because nothing much anyone can do..

UNLESS you are prepared to have the police follow every ones moves       EVERYONE ..
Basically live with you and follow you..

So how else do you stop someone who is prepared to DIE.. :-\

... mostly from exercises of the human rights of self-determination & self-defense, regardless of whether the lawful defender reasonably felt* they have no choice but to plead guilty (as if they were the "murderer" of who was in reality, a criminal aggressor), because they wouldn't get a fair trial due to "guilt by skin color" or "guilt by association", etc.

*as public defenders and the ACLU are loathe to perfectly defend self-defense with firearm cases in a country where that's the quintessential self-defense weapon.

I was watching the last leg it's a tv programme on C4 in the UK ..

A Muslim women come on and said she is sick of hearing British people say THIS..

Oh my dad or gran dad fought for this country she said i am sick of hearing it
she said who cares that was in the past.. I WAS PISSED..WHY you ASK?..

So the soldiers that are serving in our ARMED FORCES right now ..    

What do they tell there children and gran children WHY THEY FIGHT or are in the ARMY..

Well ACCORDING to some Cheeky Muslim BITCH he or she will not be allowed to say this..


Oh my dad or gran dad fought for this country she said i am sick of hearing it ..

SO WHAT DOES OUR SOLDIERS SAY TODAY ..
They are in the army to protect WHAT..  Some rich guys businesses ?..

So to all our soldiers in the armed forces you cannot say your fighting to protect your nation and make it a better and safer place for you to live..


THE MUSLIMS DON'T LIKE IT..

She said we MUSLIMS get sick of when people they say my parents or gran parents fought for this country..

At this rate the UK will have no soldiers ..
They are even jailing our soldiers for past wars ..Not the enemy but our own soldiers.. :o

THE UK IS NO MUSLIM NATION and it will never ever be one..
WAR before it falls to ISLAMIC BELIEVERS ..

Just goes to show how different we think ..

A Muslims way of thinking is only good for another Muslims way of thinking..
Because your way of thinking is so ALIEN to ME..

That's why we don't practice our own faith in the UK it's all BULL..

I am sick of hearing in MY COUNTRY i am a Muslim ..
Well good for you and fuck off and take the PEDO vicars with you..
Remember it all comes from the desert the 3 main RELIGIONS take them back to your
SHIT HOLES IN THE SAND..
  

Do you know WHAT?.

I do have more in common with ALIENS than MUSLIMS ..

I would get on better ..Because for one THEY ARE NOT LIARS ..
They have come vast distances to get here so they know for sure no god
SO NO BULLSHIT.. ;).

The UK cops are a joke. They are patrolling streets with just plastic batons in their hands. And remember that most of the street gangs in London are armed with sub-machine guns and body armor. No wonder that it took them a lot of time to take down the perpetrators of this attack.

If a gang member's machine gun was shoved in your face, would you surrender & fear even reporting the incident to police, or would you encourage them to kill you?

^ Ah, the tired "absence of evidence is definitely evidence of absence" argument. ^

1. Most guns do not need to be fired to achieve surrender to whatever the wielder wills. Very few are insane and lack the instinct of self-preservation.
2. Bad guys make their own guns, even in prisons. "Good" guys don't because they follow the law against it.
3. Bad guys don't like taking fire whatsoever, especially fire from people who have already been shot, so their self-preservation instinct & common sense says: select only soft, defenseless targets, who have no choice but to surrender, without any noise to signal authorities or fellow civilians at the highest decibel level short of explosives (when it's already too late). On an effective prison island where all innocents are effectively defenseless, a common murderer as opposed to a terrorist who works with other terrorists to improvise explosive devices that don't prematurely detonate, or someone who wishes to uses their weapon to achieve compliance, will use the quietest lethal weapon so the most noise generated is the victim's scream, which carries far shorter distances than what would be their defensive gunshots, if human rights weren't infringed.
4. You could report to police, but the gang would find you and punish you, as the police cannot instantly roll up the whole gang at once.
5. Ah, the tired "gun violence" trope, as if all unfired gun violence by the violent criminals being the sole beneficiaries of laws, as if they had enacted all the laws themselves, doesn't matter.

https://pastebin.com/raw/r1qpzbpS

/ignore

The Europeans are not idiots. If they did it was a reason. Try to enter Europe from a third country officially. You will fill a lot of documents to prove that you have the money and explain the purpose of the visit. This is not the fact that you open a visa. Merkel is deliberately allowed the crowd "Neanderthals" in Europe to destroy it from the inside. Another version I have.

@TBZ

Why do nations like japan and south korea where the population has literally 0 guns have nearly no gun or violent crime?

Ok i know east asian übermensch. Bad example.

Lets take the scandinavian nations, swiss, france and germany.
The population there has 1/2 to a bit more then 1/3 the amount of guns in relation to the US.
The amount of gun related deaths/crime are less then 1/10 to 1/30 of that in the USA.

More guns = more safety only works in the delusional US american utopia where muricans are world saviors and police in one.

Get real and wake up you IMC sheep.

/facepalm


/edit

Prison inmates producing guns... jeez what can you say about such astonishing display of knowledge in arms manufacturing. You must be one of the CEO's of lockheed & co ::)

You are right. Legal immigration to the European Union is extremely difficult, and the formalities itself will take a lot of your time (especially of you are living in a third world nation). But the Mediterranean immigrants don't bother about any of this. It is free entry for them.

The real law constitution that protects the citizen should be that you can have as much and any kind of guns with no permission from anyone and it should be mandatory that you are armed. If that is not the case then the cryminal has the gun and you don't. Plus it's to keep my tyrant country in check.

Now that's not the case anywhere it use to be once in the land of the free but even there they are removing that freedom and soon we will be on a planet where tyrants and criminals have guns and you are just a sheep hoping not to run into one of the 2.

That's my assesment and I know i'm right and most of you freedomhaters are wrong!

I haven't been following this thread, but a question for clarification: if UK did permit guns, which they do already, were kids supposed to be open carrying/concealed carrying at a pop concert? Or were they supposed to be strapped while strolling across London Bridge?

If UK did have weapons, why would anyone have been armed in these circumstances, in public venues, where you can't even take guns? (Try taking a piece into a Taylor Swift concert. You won't get far). Terror tends to happen in public.

So, for all our gun laws over here, has any citizen actually been armed during a terror attack, and had a chance to use their firearm to ameliorate the situation?

No.

Guns are cool, but they don't really solve domestic security problems. And you don't want them to. That's what the cops are for. You don't want enforcement in the hands of citizens. There are people on this forum that I talk to on a daily basis, that I cringe to think might own a firearm.

I'm not linking to any of the gutter-rag tabloid publications running the story, but it turns out that Boris "Arseclown" Johnson is at least partially responsible for the deaths of the victims on London Bridge.  Back when he was mayor in 2010, he campaigned for the removal of the "ugly" steel barriers that used to stand between the road and the pavement along the length of the bridge.  This left pedestrians completely vulnerable to attack from vehicles.  Since the attack, they've hastily built a concrete barrier, apparently realising their fatal mistake.

Plus, there's still the ongoing question of whether the attackers themselves had been recruited by Britain's own government (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1875172.0) to fight in proxy wars in Libya and Syria before being brought home again.

Law-abiding, mentally-sound, sober adults present were.


The dystopia of UK did have weapons, only in the hands of violent criminals, and of course police minutes away. Law-abiding, mentally-sound, sober adult civilians trusted to keep children safe, did not. It would remain a dystopia if the only place law-abiding, mentally-sound, sober adult civilians could legally possess weapons was at home - where they would be burgled safely when the occupants have left.


In the terror attacks that haven't been in "gun-free zones" (almost none of them, because very few are insane & want to be shot before or effectively the same instant that they hurt innocents, so they only select soft, defenseless/undefended targets), yes.


Revisionist history duly noted.


They deter them, & "gun-free zones" guarantee them. The human right to self-defense ≠ "enforcement". I cringe to think you're allowed to vote peoples' human rights be infringed & disserve on a jury.

/ignore

You mad? I'm not even trolling, I wasn't trying to be a dick when I asked these questions.

You can't bring guns in public venues here. You might be from across the pond,  I'm not sure. But in the US, they don't let people, even in open carry States, go into concerts with guns. This is what I was implying. Unless they would pass significantly different gun laws, there would have been no guns in this concert. The thing with allowing people to have guns is that often 'law abiding, mentally sound adults' aren't the one with the guns. And if a person has no priors, they can buy a gun and be a fucking lunatic. I don't want lunatics with guns period, even if that means eroding my rights. Besides, I thought you can have long guns in the UK. Which is a better choice for home defense, a shotgun trumps a handgun indoors in your home, with non combatants. Wouldn't want to deal with the risk of penetration.

How am I revising something that never happened? Please name a terror event where someone used a gun against the terrorist. You won't, because of the very same reason you have mentioned. Terrorist wouldn't attack hard targets. You are absolutely right, the terror attacks will simply target different venues, like a kids pop concert, because if the adults are armed, there are always kids that aren't.

Don't know if you are mad because of something else I wrote, but I'm very pro gun. I was just asking serious questions I didn't understand, and I still don't.

Sorry if I was rude.

Edit: again, still trying to understand. If long guns are legal in the UK, which they are for hunting purposes, is it that you are advocating concealed/open carry of handguns? To the best of my knowledge, there would be few indoor places that would allow you to bring a gun in even with a permit. Thus is why you get metal detected at concerts, I have been to ALOT of concerts. Also happens at theme parks, clubs, basically anywhere the venue doesn't want to accept liability if someone pops someone. So even in America, the land of a million guns, private property rights and state statute (you can't bring guns to schools/gov buildings with a permit) trump citizen amendment rights. Essentially, you cant have guns in places where this type of shit would happen. That's why having the laws there don't do shit.

And it's kind of on security. They should have had guns, or officers with guns should have been provided by the municipal government.

In theory, it is all good. But it is not always practical. Suppose you are living in a crime infested area with your family. You realize that your house is being invaded by a few criminals. How you are going to react? Will you call the cops and wait until they arrive, or are you going to defend your family using your own firearms? I would prefer the second option.

I agree with you 100%. I don't have a problem with current US gun laws, for the most part.  You should have a long gun at your house to protect your family and assets. But you can already do this in both the US and UK, I think. Just pistols and assaults are banned, you shouldn't be using either class of firearm for home defence (penetration and bystanders).

In most public cases where firearms are needed, ID rather the professionals be the only armed individuals. I wouldn't want cops coming into a scenario with multiple active shooters, not knowing who is a good guy or a bad guy because everyone with a gun isn't wearing a uniform.They tend to shoot people unarmed, LOL, this could get really, really bad.

And I would rather open carry than concealed. Easier to identify who might start shooting, before they do :)