Bitcoin Forum

http://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-620/h--/q-95/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/1/13/1421165146819/3b432ffa-6485-4f37-9f15-14750972702f-620x372.jpeg

Firearms company cuts ties with Liam Neeson over gun-control comments

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jan/20/firearms-company-para-usa-liam-neeson-gun-control (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jan/20/firearms-company-para-usa-liam-neeson-gun-control)

<< PARA USA accuses Taken 3 star of "cultural and factual ignorance" after he called the number of guns owned in the US a disgrace.

A US gun manufacturer which provided weapons for the Liam Neeson action sequel Taken 3 has criticised the Irish actor for pro-gun control comments he made in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

Neeson launched a tirade against the proliferation of firearms in the US an interview last week, while denying that Hollywood contributes to the problem. Now PARA USA says it is severing all ties with the Ballymena-born star and urged all other manufacturers to do the same. >>

Never will I understand the logic of people who think it is better to deliberately render yourself completely defenceless against armed psychopaths, they're psychopaths, they don't care if you have a gun or not, they're still going to try and murder you one way or another and it doesn't matter if you put up a gun free sign or not.

Wait but there's no way the gov't could be wrong on this one, could they??  (jk)

Until the gov't realizes PEOPLE kill PEOPLE, they will keep going after your guns.

but if the psycho gets a gun it is much easier for him to do so.

aslong as weapon control laws can secure that no criminal and mentally ill people get guns im all for it - but sadly it is not the case in most countries.

Actually, Neeson is right. Just in the wrong direction.

Our personal weapons of mass destruction are limited by government as much as possible. This limiting keeps us from having and using the most powerful handguns and rifles. No silencers (at least Britain has us beat on this one). No armor piercing rounds. No effective hollow point.

What is the real reason that government wants to limit us? Because then WE would literally be the government in every way, and we would not need them. Peace would abound. We would figure ways out for judging our disputes among ourselves. We would trade with other nations of the world individually.

No effective laws against pot usage could be maintained. The drug war would die because, the drug trade would die because, everyone could raise his own if he wanted. So, the government would stop being the money laundering haven that it has become because the drug trade money would go away.

The Federal Reserve Bank would wither away because we would help each other rather than need these fake loans from the FED... these so-called loans that are really creations of new money. The U.S. could no longer finance world wars. Peace and world trade would abound. Even the Muslims would stop harming people, because they wouldn't be supported by the CIA in their jihad on the nations.

All this because we don't understand that Neeson is right, just in exactly the wrong direction.

:)

Psychopaths will get guns either way or they'll do what the Islamic terrorists do and just make bombs, which in actual fact are far easier and more undetectable to get than guns ever will be. I can tell you now it would probably be pretty easy for me to make enough explosives to take out the big ben here in the UK than it would be to to buy a handgun illegaly and it would to several times more damage.

All you need is the right amount of chemicals and various other ingredients ( Just to show people I'm on their side I won't post exactly what that is but it's bloody easy ) so this paranoia about guns has me absolutely fascinated. What's even more fascinating is how there are people out there who actually feel assured that a bunch of uniformed people are running around waving their guns at everybody and telling them what they can and can't do.

America has failed to evolve with their gun laws. Its too late now. Good luck disarming everyone!

So here is a guy who entertains people with gun violence and thinks me shooting paper targets is a disgrace.

Whatever.  ::)

I'm so glad I'm not living in US ;D
They're thinking it's better to let innocent people defend their self against goddamn psychopath. :-\

I prefer to have strict gun controls than weak gun controls. If you read enough new stories about high school kids shooting other kids, or mentally unstable individuals shooting random people on the side walk, you must believe there is something wrong with gun controls, right?

True, these people are psychopaths, cant argue with them. You'll get the instant neckshot.

Whenever a politician or your government says "You don't need to have guns"....

You NEED to have guns.

It's not what's wrong with guns or gun mentality. It's what's wrong with the school system, the home life, and government and school propaganda.

Jumping into full free gun freedom in one moment may be dangerous. What is needed is slow implementation with training included. Much of the training needs to be based on good morals, something movies and TV along with school training has done away with.

:)

EDIT: One thing that strict gun controls do is, the only way to implement strict gun controls is to do it with guns. Who is going to enforce gun control over people who have guns? There is only one way to do it... use guns against the people being controlled.

If you have a bunch of people wielding guns to control others so that they don't have guns, what is there to stop the gun wielders when they want to take over and impose a dictatorial society, where everyone is a slave?

And don't tell me they wouldn't do it... make slaves of everyone who didn't have guns. They are doing it all over the world right now. Africa is one example.

Although Iraqi people often have guns, the controllers are trying to take their guns away. It is happening right now, and has been for more than the last 10 years in Iraq!

I am so glad I am not a french policeman... ::)

https://i.imgur.com/cWGhq9q.jpg

That French cop didn't die. Complete fabrication inside job. Politics in action along with propaganda to get the people to ask for protection.

:)

The cop was already dead. His body was kept frozen from that plane crash. Yeah! That plane crash. He was then dumped on that sidewalk from a moving bicycle...  ::)

We all want the same thing. It's sad and horrifying when some angry, stupid guy takes out his hatred on the innocent. It could be a crazy person or even a kid, as you point out. But that has nothing to do with guns or rules. You have never been, and will never be safe from a psychopathic killer.  Even those of us who carry a gun everyday could be shot dead by a mental patient who just walks up and shoots.
However, some of us do stand a chance and insist that we have the right to try defending ourselves. Your question implies that if we just had another rule the crazy people would listen. They will not. Once they are in a murderous state they will be greeted with violence.  It might be me, a local cop, or the state swat team; but whoever it is they will have guns.

We know mentally unstable people were unstable because some of those killers were followed by doctors. We never know what kind of medications they were taking because of "patient privacy and confidentiality"....

We need to focus on guns exclusively, always. How convenient.


 

I don't like the idea of some joker walking down the street shooting me dead because I happened to be there. But I don't like the idea of supporting all kinds of killing in the Middle East by my government, along with police and SWAT killing in America for no reason, because my government forces me to pay taxes.

In other words, I don't like freedom that kills me and others, and I don't like slavery that kills me and others. So, what are the options? I'd say, stop the slavery done by government and the banks, even if it happens to kill me. Such "stopping" would include arming everyone. If I find out in the future that this was wrong, at that time we can bring back government and the banks. For now, down with government and banking slavery. Up with freedom.

:)

Guns are probably the most inefficient tool for killing people in a first-world country.
1) GSW mortality rates show that you are way more likely to survive than die.
2) BANG BANG BANG! draws unwanted attention, from a murderer's perspective (men/women with guns and medics), from long distances that wouldn't be if there were a beating, strangling or stabbing of someone (or multiple people) to death. Explosions draw attention from a long distance too, but it is already too late to save the fatal blast radius victims.
3) Guns and ammo cost $$$$. People have been hit with over 10 rounds and survived, while one shot kills from non-sniper ideal conditions and suicides, are rare. Knives and explosives (which you can apparently make with fertilizer) are cheap, bludgeons and limbs are free.

Good point. If you look at clubs, poison, knives and martial arts killings, well, you just don't hear much about it. But it is going on these other ways all the time.

Clearly guns have great advantages. But these advantages are not as great as the media advertises them to be. Anyone who is out to murder someone will do it without guns if no guns are around.

If government is the only one who has guns, then they will be the mass murderers.

:)

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

true, but incomplete. try:

Guns don't kill people. People with knives, plutonium, ricin poison, arrows, ebola, rocks, heavy boots, trained dogs, electricity, piano wire, karate skillz, lasers, tanks, flame throwers, trap doors, anthrax spores, clubs, cars, brass knuckles, or guns kill people.

But most often they don't, or we'd mostly all be dead.

:)

the government understands this quit well that's why they take away your guns in the first place.

if this was in America the guys would have been shot the second they jumped out of the car with ak-47s

That's why many American "publishings" get away with a whole lot more than Charlie H.

:)