Holy crap... why only the Dj's surely not a case of "you Dj so bad" or when request go wrong.

This is exactly why guns,clubs and alcohol don't mix. My condolences to any of you who knew these dudes.

was that the tony montana in the youtube vid on the other post?

I recommend others to read the linked article. My, oh my... what a story, and how tragic.

WHAT... THE....

<<<< SPEECHLESS.

my condolences as well

Wow, that's very sad. Everyone should read this article, it all stems from an argument over a mic.

Was that the Tony Montana video in a nother thread?

What I mean. Was that the actual Tony Montana in the video who got killed?

totally crazy.

Oh my oh my. Tonie's poor kids.

Looks like some gigs opened up

^^ Bad Sniffles!

***Pours some out for fallen bredrin***

gonna dedicate the set tonight to these boys

The Tony Montana that was killed was a Bahamian. not the funk flex scratching tony montana...

either way. its sucks to hear about shit like this.... always makes you think twice about breaking some dudes balls cause he requested soulja boy.....

i42.photobucket.com

viewmorepics.myspace.com

Quote
not the funk flex scratching tony
montana...
Thank god. But still it's sad. But thank god it's not the Funk flex Montana.

Quote
Bahamian.
What is a Bahamian?

Guy from the Bahamas.

Oh.

I never let anybody get on the mic at all, did you read when the guy when to his car to get a AK47 to go back to the club.
This is crazy everyone that works at club be aware all the time you, never know how many crazy people are out there.

yeah, that guy really wanted to kill some folks

Wow thats some messed up shit...Over a microphone and the guy earle who was in the original fight didnt get shot his friends who had nothing to do with it were shot and killed...How the hell does he get a gun past metal detectors and pat downs?

Im glad i decided to not dj ghetto spots any more.

Didn't know any of the victims, but hits really really close to home! I lived in Tampa for a minute and never heard of DJ's getting gunned down. May God be with them and their families

fucked up shit.

Any gig you need to bring a piece to is a gig you should have turned down.

Oh oh oh my oh my oh my. That's so sad.

Sad sad day. Over what? His boy didn't get the mic. Iove my countrymen and all but some of them don't know how to act.

lol sniffles, i was thinking the same thing

truly a fucked up situation, i hope they can catch the clown who did it

You guys need some tougher gun control, it's all we and good to say "I have the right to carry a gun" but when some nut also has the same right, shit can go down in some really bad ways.

About 10 or so years ago we had a nutcase start shooting at tourists here in Australia mumbling crap about W.A.S.P's (white Anglo Saxon People)

vv Wiki quote vv

The Port Arthur massacre of 28 April 1996 was a killing spree which claimed the lives of 35 people and wounded 37 others mainly at the historic Port Arthur prison colony, a popular tourist site in south-eastern Tasmania, Australia. Martin Bryant, a 28-year-old from New Town, eventually pleaded guilty to the crimes and was given 35 life sentences without possibility of parole.The Port Arthur massacre remains Australia's deadliest incident of a mass killing spree and is among one of the deadliest such incidents worldwide in recent times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------

Very soon after this the Police offered an amnesty on semi-auto fire arms, also from that day on you needed a good reason for owning any fire arm. The farmers were up in arms but the government replied that you don't need a semi to kill a Kangaroo or fox.

I'm sure that there are still some freaks running round with fire arms that they didn't surrender, but im sure that the above steps have limited incidents such as this.

I don't know just my thoughts, how about you lot?

Supposedly these guys were from Poison Dart (respected reggae sound), sad
www.yardflex.com

I would bet the weapons they carried wernt done legally and lawfully. meaning that it had nothing to do with gun control.

no one would blame cars if DJs were run down instead of shot


Ive owned at least one gun, sometimes several since the late eighties, most of the time legal, sometimes illegal depending on the state. Ive never shot anyone, never pointed at anyone, no kids have ever played with any of them. Taking my guns will never ever save anyones life, just like taking all my cooking knives wont save anyones life.

the only thing gun control does is put more guns in the hands of people willing to commit crime in the first place by owning them. I would rather be a criminal then a victim of a criminal (including criminal authority)

historically only slaves, serfs, peasantry and other subgegated second classed persons and non-persons have been bared from owning personal arms.

and especially in the historical context of the history of the US (certain people being disarmed) I take offense at anyone suggestion I give up my weapons.

anyone making the argument that I should not be allowed to own a weapon might as well be making the argument that I should not be allowed to defend myself.

the real reason for gun control laws is to move even more power into the hands of the state. when only the state, or a privilege class of people are allowed to own weapons you are well on your way to tyranny

case: home.houston.rr.com

What AKIEM said... +45 and +9

Akiem I do understand your point but.....

you try telling that to the families and loved ones of those 35 tourist, and god knows how many victims of the shootings in your schools.

"anyone making the argument that I should not be allowed to own a weapon might as well be making the argument that I should not be allowed to defend myself"

I'm not saying you can't defend your self but in the example of your cooking knives you have at least a chance of escape.

People perpetrating criminal activity usually get caught sooner or later and as here in Australia if they are found with illegal firearms they are charged, that gets added to their wrap sheet the gun is removed and destroyed, one less gun on our streets.

We have a greatly reduced number of shootings due to this, and you can’t argue with the figures. The U.K also has this same method and the Police are unarmed there.

Thats a big call. Is it just a coincidence that the USA has slack gun control and a high rate of gun violence, while countries with stringent gun laws like Australia have a very low rate of gun violence?
My point:
-If its difficult for many people to get guns then that naturally lowers the amount filtering into illegal hands, directly or indirectly from gun retailers.
-Its harder to keep or use illegal weapon because everyone knows that there are strict gun laws, so offenders are more likely to be reported and arrested.
-Police aren't inundated with many cases of involving gun violence, therefore any cases that do arise can be dealt with effectively and there is a bigger responsibility to solve these cases because gun violence isn't the norm like in the projects and whatnot.

wikipedia.com
"Many suffer non-fatal gunshot wounds, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimating 52,447 violence-related and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000"

That would be in bad taste. I wouldnt try to sale a set of stake knives to a family who lost someone to knife violence ether. I wouldnt check the newspapers for families who lost someone to a car accidents and try to sale them cars since they probably need a new one.

Back in the day (Im not old enough to remember) but students brought hunting riffles to school and high schools had rifle sport teams, where was all the school shootings back then?



huh? Im not going to name all the ways I could kill you without giving you any chance for escape, none.

conversely a hand gun is an excellent way to defend yourself against one or multiple attackers.




and less cars will reduce auto accident deaths.



UK police are armed, just not the little patrol fellows

only the change in the choice of weapon has changed www.aic.gov.au
even if the murder rate decreased there are way more factors at play then how many guns are on the street

also twice as many murders, 33% are committed with knives, shouldnt they be higher on the list for confiscation? what about automobiles, shouldnt they be confiscated? far more people are killed by car.



I learned to shoot at summer camp (no one died), but I became comfortable with a gun. obviously rifles have since been banned. but I dont turn into a scared little bitch if I see a gun. Ive let people take a look at my weapons and they turn into scared shivering limp persons. why? the same person will sit across from me while a cut my broccoli with a knife. the same person will walk in front of my car while its in drive, or fall asleep in the front while I do 80mph racing a semi truck. I could kill everyone just by falling asleep. But "oh no, is that a gun? I cant even be in the same building with it!" why? you have been manipulated by government propaganda to believe that they should be the only one with any weapons. conditioned like pavlov humans

Keep your gun, it's fine.. but 3 people with a whole life ahead of them died cos some dude decided to take his to the club.. I have lived 31 years on this earth without the need to carry a gun, I will live another 40+ doing the same.

I have not been manipulated by government propaganda, simple fact is guns kill, that after all is what they where built to do. If you are robbed let them steal everything, you may have lost some valuables,but you are still alive.

And yes cars do kill people, usually by accident. Knife kills, a good point that you raise, most of these cases usually require a premeditated wish to do harm and require multiple wounds to kill. A normal person would drop a knife after the first stroke (normal state of mind), it only takes one bullet.

I'm not starting anything but you must admit.

I'd much rather the weapons in the hands of my government than some of the freaks round here. My brother was put in a coma for a week due to a baseball bat to the head (I was there)thank god it wasn't a gun, he now has brain damage but is still with us.

VIOLENCE IS NO ANSWER, I'VE SEEN FIRST HAND.

Nah. They they cause he decided to shoot the gun with the purpose of killing them. Let's be real about it. If they all had guns, it would've been a different story.

That's why I'm always packing (or not). :P

lol... Wow. Sadly, your government must be a better one cause I don't trust my government with weapons.

I think the car argument is used in a wrong way.
Having cars is a necessity these days. You can´t abolish them but you can greatly reduce the number of deaths by enforcing speed limits and being totally strict on driving under the influence of something.

Same with Knives. Cooking knives are intended to be used for cooking but of course you can use them as a weapon.
Combat knives have to be restricted as well.

Is there a necessity to have guns? In an environment where everyone owns a gun, maybe. But an armed population is archaic to my mind. The general armamend has to be redused.

And if you think it is freedom to have a gun you are wrong.
Or is having no speed limit at all also individual freedom?

To my mind a peacefull society is a big part of my personal freedom.
Not the possibility to threaten someone or to put others in danger.

+1 If the gubment can have them then I should be able to have them too. (no NRA)

I'm gonna throw this out there: bullet-proof DJ booths.

But seriously, who goes into a club and shoots the DJ's? It's spooky how crazy and stupid some people can be.

People in the US across many parts of the political spectrum hold their guns dearly. Any gun control efforts here face a long, uphill fight- to put it mildly.

I dont believe they died "cos some dude decided
to take his to the club" anymore then some dude drove an auto to the club, or if they would have banned mics on the premises (guess how the argument started), or if they would have banned negroes from clubs, or if alcohol prohibition were in effect, or if the victims chose a different career, etc, etc.

Its naive to believe that gun prohibition would magically fade the gun out of the guys hand, all things remaining equal like a movie effect. and even if that were true, suppose a molotov cocktail and padlocks faded into the guys hand instead?

Ive lived those same 30+ years and have never killed anyone even though Ive owned a gun nearing half those 30+ years. Owning a gun does not make you a murderer. I hope that I will never ever be in a situation where I need a gun. But I would much rather be in a situation where I need a gun then be in a situation where I wish I had one.



Everyone is manipulated by government propaganda, believing that you havnt been is a tell tail sign that you have.

I wont kill anyone over most of my belongings or money in my pocket, thats not why I own a gun. But if you try to harm one of my loved ones, or load me in a boxcar, I am going to use my gun, and whatever else I can get my hands on. Its too bad humans are so vicious to each other but pacifism is often a luxury of the protected.



I drive cars, and carry knives too, I even own a sword, none of which has transformed me into a murderer. I could kill allot more people without a gun, improvised weaponry. And all of us who drive have the same opportunities to become a mass murderer at whim.




should we ban bats?

I would point a gun at anyone brandishing a bat against my brother. perhaps if you were armed you could have prevented your brother from getting his head bashed in.

thats why I always carry. drunk people and expensive equipment.

My hands are considered weapons of mass destruction. :P

Most states already have laws against having guns inside establishments where alcohol is served.

here if they serve food its ok. learned all that shit in the concealed class.

Shiiiiit. In some places, the food itself can kill you!!! hahahaha

Son of a bitch this is some crazy shit.

Suddenly I'm glad that I only DJ weddings.

in this sentence alone, you prove to show that you are manipulated by propaganda.

Its a cheesy line but it is very much true, guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Think about it, use this with terms we all can understand. Bad ass DJ equipment doesnt make a bad ass dj, a bad ass dj makes a bad ass dj.


In the United States, it is our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms. Right after the most important amendment, the right to free speech.

We live in a world where we fear our government, where in reality, they should fear us. But because of weak minded people in this world who fear all and question nothing, it becomes backward.

That AK didnt kill those people, the person pulling the trigger did. If he didnt have a gun, Im sure he would of had a knife. Does this give you a better chance of defending yourself? Sure, but you know what? Doesnt matter, wreckless people with no care for law or human life will get their hands on a gun regardless if that is their mentality. Illegal arms trade hold more money transactions than anything else in the world, so the shit is going to happen anyways.

*sonned*

how did two of the dudes die from shoulder wounds? aren't those of the non-lethal sort? I mean.. tell me he caught both guys in a major artery and they both bleed to death.. that's some carnival shooting right there..

you can get shot in the shoulder, but AK rounds are made to travel thru the body so more than likely it hit the lung

The bullets were laced with a DJ Sniffles' mix... deadly. lol

not in the good way, i trainwreck 67% percent of the time.....all the time

Read the article. The perpetrator used a handgun on the DJs, then went back to his car to get an AK-47 to go shoot the MC that was hiding in the bathroom, but his friends stopped him from shooting anyone with the AK.

oooh yea, well same goes for a hand gun. Could of hit a bone and bounced off and hit his lung or something.

lol @ AK-47..... the shooter was just nutty.

*sonned*
what does that mean?

www.urbandictionary.com

"guns don't kill people, people kill people"

true... but if your community is flooded with legal & illegal guns, the likelihood that an argument will be 'resolved' with gunfire is far higher.
Guns are way too commonplace in America.

...you can't tell me this dude had the second amendment in mind when he wanted to spray a club with an AK.

i think i read that each dj was shot 3 times, regardless, i knew a kid who died after shooting himself in the leg.

"wow, you just got sonned"

who is advocating flooding a community with illegal guns? no one. Murderers are too commonplace in america.

If someone is killed with a steak knife, do we have 'too many steak knives' in america?

If someone is killed run down with a car, do we have 'too many cars' in america?

The problem is we have too many murderers. period. What do you think will happen if you flood a community with murderers? Take all the murderers and you will have 0 murders no matter how many guns.

home.houston.rr.com
dont skip that link, read it, its what happens when you put more guns in a community.


the problem is the impulse to kill, not the method used.

suppose that since this badman nut didnt have a gun he instead tossed molotov in the club, or what if he smashed his car into the club. is anyone going to call for banning cars and empty rum bottles?

cars kill way more people then guns, get rid of cars first. it would also be better for the environment and better energy efficiency

take that emotional propaganda wash off for a moment and recognize that automobiles are way more dangerous then guns. next time your in your car think for a moment, if you chose to, how many people could you run down and kill with ease, what would stop you? Or when you are speeding down the freeway, take a moment to notice how with a simple flick of the wrist you could kill everyone.

Its a tragedy every time a kid finds a gun and kills his friend by accident. But why is it treated as the worst tragedy ever, but the same kid dies in a car accident and it hardly makes the news.

Take a loaded gun, out it on your lap and fall asleep, nothing happens. Try that falling asleep shit driving a car.

cars are far more dangerous, accident prone and kill more people.









um no, if he even knew what the second amendment is, I would bet that he already lost his second amendment rights because of a pryor convictions. if not, Im pretty sure that he was rude boy gundelero badman. you think if he had no access to guns he would just forget about it?

6 million ways to die choose one

the problem is the guy is a nut, a murderer, a badman


why should I give up my legally owned, safely kept and no body weapon because this fool chooses a gun? what does he have to do with me?




a gun is a tactical device, you can use it to defend yourself real well. this is why there is a systematic assault on the Second Amendment, and in conjunction with the rest of the Bill of Rights. you can use a gun to defend yourself, it is a tactical device you can use it to mount a resistance to tyranny. and you cant do that with a car.

think about that. 6 million ways to die choose one.
hardly 6 million ways to defend yourself

i stopped reading after this, which pretty much sums it up for me.






*thread locked

The main point here is Gun ownership is fine as long as the owner is fit to carry a weapon, unfortunately lots aren’t. My original post was just a demonstration that gun control can actually work, maybe not in the U.S as your 2nd amendment would contradict this, but here it works very well.

“Rude boy gundelero badman” needs to work his arse of to be able to find a firearm here, and usually by the time he actually gets his hands on one he’s forgotten who or what he was originally pissed at. I don’t think I ever stated that you shouldn’t have the right to be armed, just that you be a fit and level headed person with a need to carry one.

I’m a security officer with a federal government department that recently pissed a section of the country off, I don’t carry a gun, I would if it was called for but like I said gun control can work.

*thread locked I want the last word lol

guns suck.

guns dont suck, irresponsible people with guns suck

Actually I kinda don’t mind guns, the M1 garand with it’s metallic “ting” as the clip pin springs out after the last round and B.A.R 50 cal are both favourites of mine.

I like (probably not the right word) guns, just not nutcases.

and no one is saying this guy should have had a gun

ok, gun control works to do what? Does it lower the murder rate? no. It only, or mostly just changes the choice of weapon. Would it have been less terrible if the murder used a machete, or toss a molotov in the DJ booth? This guy had a week from the initial incident to decide what he was going to do. If he could not get his hands on a gun there are plenty of other terrible things he could have devised. Do you think he would have just said 'I cant get a gun, fuck it'? Or are you saying that the gun somehow talked him into committing the murder? Gun or no gun this guy was probably going to murder someone.

You know the right to keep and bear arms does not extend from the Second Amendment. It stops the government from infringing on that Right. The Right is a natural right, a birth right, or a God given right, or a sovereign right, its up to you as a free individual to assert, practice or declare that right. It cant be taken away from you, only trampled, infringed or forced from you. Thats what I think anyway.



I remember one of my first jobs as an unarmed security guard. My job was to call they guys with guns if something happened.

did you just compare cars to guns? oh my lol....

why not?

Did you loose someone to a car accident Akiem? not being a smart arse just wondering.

Haha, thanks! :-)

Most of these types of incidents happen because the shooter is a complete coward. A gun is the perfect weapon for a coward, you can wave it in the air and everyone hits the deck, you can point it and people piss em selves.

Now a machete is a pretty up close and personal weapon most cowards would think twice about using one, sure they might get one in but then they got to deal with some pretty pissed off bystanders who are probably going to jump on them and beat the living shit out of them (and this does happen)

So even if a form of gun control weeds out the coward shooter isn’t this a least a start.
Ah fukit I got nothing.

AKIEM….. STILL THE UNDEFEATED FORUM CHAMPION OF THE WORLD.

All I can say is thank god Australia has gun control because the whole country started as a place for Britain to dump its convicts lol.

@AKIEM
I think it is way harder to overcome one's inhibitions and to use a molotow cocktail or a knife and that it is way easier to simply pull a trigger.

Well, and if guns make places safer then that must be one of the reasons why the US is such a peacefull place. ;-)

Captain AKIEM. :P

Violence will exist regardless of the type of weapons available. I liked the whole falling asleep analogy. It's a clever one, but not entirely accurate. To be equal, you would have to have falling asleep WHILE shooting. That would be the same as falling asleep while driving. Otherwise, fall asleep while your car is parked and nothing happens.

But I understood the point you were trying to make.....

I like machetes btw. And to the person who said that guns are easy cause you can just pull the trigger.... you can can just as easily with a machete and it's more fun! Ask me how I know. :P

...and I also want to say that whoever said that you'd forget about killing just cause you couldn't get a weapon or it wasn't accessible is a la la land citizen. When you have a grudge and you wanna kill someone. You don't forget. If your intention is to hurt someone, it will happen regardless of how long it takes.

Machete + kill not machete + trigger. I missed the 'kill' part.

I see AKIEM's point too... I agree with Sixxx that it's not entirely accurate, but I see the point. A better analogy would be that cancer kills people... Why? Because there's no human involvement. Like sixxx said, parked cars don't kill people, distracted, drunk, inexperienced PEOPLE kill people. Just like deranged, psychotic, idiotic people with no regard for human life kill people - guns don't.

why not compare guns & guns? let's see...

...a handgun or an assault weapons primary function is to shoot PEOPLE. Human beings. You don't hunt deer with handguns, you don't hunt with an AK or an Uzi.

A car's primary function is... well, it's not killing people.

If I lived in the States I'd probably have guns too... It seems like you've gotten to the point where normal people need guns to protect them from the bad people they get shown on TV 24/7.
If you own a weapon & carry it... you must play out scenarios in your head of how you'd use it in certain situations. Perpetually ready to 'handle shit'.

You gotta remember this is an international forum, and that from the outside looking in, America's appetite for firearms is mind boggling. From both sides of the debate too.

I'll protect myself just as good with a handgun or a shotgun made for hunting. Once again, it's the intent or purpose for shooting that matters.

... or a machete, or a car. Yes. I can also turn a car into a weapon.

Never seen them French chicks doin that, but it sounds hot.

"machete killings it's more fun! Ask me how" Sounds like a sweet t-shirt design lol.

Yeah like I said I got nothin, and I knew 3 days ago i'd never win a gun debate against a bunch of yanks, but no Ped-R, ya just had to go and pushit didnt you.

Good on ya lads, it's been real

I'm Mexican.

lol

And love the t-shirt.... lol

- the point I was making is that certain guns have only one purpose. Convenient, effective people-killing devices. Having lots of them in your community is obviously dangerous.
That whole 'protect myself' paranoia is ingrained in America's psyche.

Again, a car CAN be turned into a weapon but it's not what it's meant to be used for. Sorry, it's just a bad analogy.

having lots of guns in a community would not be dangerous. Having criminals and unstable people I a community would be dangerous

The world is a fucked up place.

Period.

People with guns kill people.

Outlaw people.

Then the world would be a better place.

All this talk about the constitution and the 2nd ammendment. I don't know.

Every so often, people get together and decide parts of the constitution need correcting. This might be one of them things that need "correcting". But How?

Look at the 18th ammendment, (1919): Prohibited the manufacturing, importing, and exporting of alcoholic beverages. In 1933 they realized it wasn't working and repealed it by coming up with the Twenty-First Amendment and allowed states to import alcohol.

Seems like the 2nd Amendment is open to "interpretation". They should have been more clear when they wrote that shit.

Somethings got to be done, but what? Stiffer penalties for unlicensed guns?

I get all my meat from the grocery store or sometime a restaurant. I won't be hunting anytime soon, so there's no need for me to have a gun, rifle, slingshot or boomerang.

I’m sure it’s nice to know that you have some protection if needed but answer me these 3 questions.

1. How long have you owned a firearm?
2. How many times have you needed to use said firearm? (even if only drawn)
3. Could you possibly go on for the rest of your life without it?

1. 6 years
2. More times than I can count
3. Maybe...but I know this, IF the US was ever invaded, the invading countries ground troops are gonna have problems. Its doubtful that it would happen, but with chinas competing economy, russias overhaul of their military, and n. Koreas complete hate for us (yes I've been up to the line and its not bs propaganda, they really hate us).....I'm not gonna say it couldn't happen. And if it did, please believe I'd be the first to lace up those boots yet again

1. Many years.
2. Shot a few people with it.
3. Sure.. but then again, my life would've been a short one if I hadn't used it to PROTECT MYSELF!

+1

lol... It could actually be the opposite. If, as a thief, etc... you know that a certain block of people have a bunch of guns... you would think more than twice about robbing any of their homes.

It's like installing a car alarm. The thief will attempt to steal something that's easier.

You keep saying that guns are design to kill people. That's cause and effect. You can use them to effectively protect your property or yourself WITHOUT killing anyone. I'll wound your ass first before I aim for your head.

The other point...


A gun is very useful. Sure you can protect yourself with a bat, a knife, a machete, etc... but if it's you against say 6 people, a gun is the smarter choice.

and in that case sixxx, if ur the only one who is armed, more than likely you won't have to so much but show it

Yup. Then, you can actually walk away and no one gets hurt. No one. Including them.

Once again it boils down to brains... intent, etc.

1. around 20 years
2. about twice as a deterrent
3. Yes, hopefully but, chances are no. there was a time when I was known to carry a pistol and kept a shotgun in my trunk, and a revolver under my seat. This was a deterrent for some people who would have liked to come after me (even though they were mistaken about something). I believe I may be alive today because certain people were afraid of my known weaponry. Its actually an unlikely and exceptional case but.... )

and I also have a first aid kit, car jack, airbags, flashlight, shoes in boxes, shirts in plastic, hundreds of books I wont ever read, thousands of records I wont ever play, etc and etc. I still keep it tho, j i c

and then you have the principle of the mater........



FunkyRob, I agree about the 2nd Am being unclear, especially to us nowadays. But look at the context, the bill of rights is mostly about personal rights. But like I said, our rights dont come from any document, they are just specifically ensured by that document.




exactly, sometimes people need to get shot. more often they need to be threatened with being shot, and even more often they just need to consider the possibility that they might get shot.


well maybe thats even worse, its a rampaging killer murdering far more people then the machines was designed for.

what does the primary function matter? people are dying. isnt the problem the deaths? dont we want less death? why is it that the method or the device used is of such importance? people are going to die whatever the device.



utter rubbish. Im not a TV watcher.
more, in the past everyone was armed, everyone. In the early US the only unarmed people were pacifist sects and slaves.

Principal: people died for my right to vote, get paid for my labor, sit where I want on a bus, and yes, defend myself with a black .40 Glock.



no doubt, I feel sorry for you folks who have had your rights to protect yourself from simple murderers, lynch mobs or oppressive tyrants taken from you. It was yours at birth. Im thankful that I hadnt had to struggle for my right, but Im not too sure I wont have to the way things are going.

good point on its face, but look at Canada, more gun owners per person, way less murders. why arnt there more murders in Canada? the answer is: its not the guns.

again home.houston.rr.com


yes, cowards can kill from yards away. A gun gives the user a tactical advantage. Its too bad that murderers are able to gain this tactical advantage, and there are laws to prevent murderers from gaining this tactical advantage. But why should I relinquish mine? As it has already been shown with charts and shit, the murder rate does not go down. Probably unarmed people are murdered because they were not able to gain the tactical advantage that they would have with a gun.

hahaa convicts with guns,

How about the indigenous people, its kind of twisted that they get disarmed too


the US is (supposed to be) a revolutionary government of the people (white land owners). you think there are some insurgents in Iraq?

which I think is really at the heart of the matter, our governments want ALL the guns for themselves. which is always the case from day two or three

slightly off point but have you seen Mike Moore's Sicko? it's said that countries like Australia Canada and the UK's government is scared of it's own people and thats why they give free health care. I'm not sure about that it could be a possibility but we also pay a higher tax rate for that benefit.

Just on the point of brainwashing Akiem, the Aussie Government is collection of dickwits and don't usually have a whole lot to say, but they spend a shit load not saying it.

Good to see 3/3 of yaz could possibly live without a gun, Sixxx you're a bad arsed mother,I'm sure KC and the new addition would approve, how long till you daddy x2.

No shit, thats one case I'm all for. I don't think any country in it's right mind would try, almost like the Iraq situation but reversed no ROE's. Unfortunately war now will be fought in a Gorilla/terrorist manner, in and out with max damage and casualties sad really, but also quite smart I reckon the Vietnamese played a hand in perfecting this style.

I'm only having a kid so I can trade him for a gun or two. :P

Around September 19.

Guns don't kill people.












































It's those fucking bullets!

The way I look at it in my situation; living in Florida, there is no gun registration. So it is very easy to get guns legally and illegally. And being that Miami is a very high crime area I think I would be foolish not protect myself and family as well as property. I don't have guns to be a bad ass or intimidate people. Its just this environment that necessitates owning one, or 4.

There are discount and family rates... :P

home.houston.rr.com
please, anyone who believes in gun control or gun banning, or whatever, comment.

I just had the news that a friend died on the weekend, she had some major depression problems.

She died of the upper's,downer's and alcohol.

Shit fucken sux when you are 23+ years old and die due to shit like this.

sorry gents

didn´t she have a gun?

thats not cool Mojo, she is fucken dead understand!!!!!
And no she didnt have a gun... she died of a shitfull mental illness on uppers an downers. If she had a gun she might have died a lot sooner yeah?

Fucken tos

My bad, I did´nt mean to be insensitive.
I just wanted to know if there is a relationship between your story and this threat.
Keep in mind that I´m feeling with you and that I´m sorry for my remark.

all good mojo.. nothin to do with the thread sorry m8, just I ain't got anyone to tell is all....

:-)

Sorry to hear Ped-R... Depression (Real Depression) is a bitch. I know a lot of people that use the whole "depression" sickness to get off work, or whatever. We all go through shit in our lives that my put us in a depression BUT THAT'S NORMAL. People with real Depression don't have to do anything. Their life could be perfect and they're still depressed. :(

I djed at a rap show a few years ago. And there was a fight outside at the end of the night. And just when i had my decks packed up and put on the floor, some dude comes in and fires four rounds in the place.
Me and the other dj took cover, each behind one flightcase.
And all I could think of was:"I hope dude doesn't blast me cuz he did'nt like the music".

RIP my dj bredren.

this is why I have been comparing guns to cars and knives.

news.bbc.co.uk
"Reports say the suspect drove a truck into a crowd in the early afternoon and then began stabbing people at random. According to the police, five men and one woman died in the attack. Three of the males were aged 19, 47 and 74."

that one paragraph shows how opposite we are on this issue. "sometimes people need to get shot" ?!?

[quote/]
well maybe thats even worse, its a rampaging killer murdering far more people then the machines was designed for.

what does the primary function matter? people are dying. isnt the problem the deaths? dont we want less death? why is it that the method or the device used is of such importance? people are going to die whatever the device.

Primary function matters when you are comparing two things. It's YOUR comparison.




no doubt, I feel sorry for you folks who have had your rights to protect yourself from simple murderers, lynch mobs or oppressive tyrants taken from you. It was yours at birth. Im thankful that I hadnt had to struggle for my right, but Im not too sure I wont have to the way things are going.

Who said anything about rights being taken away? I can own firearms if I want to. The environment I live in doesn't require me to own them or desire them.

^ figure out where the quotes go for yourself... :)

but you are making good points.
In Germany you need to have a reason to own a gun. You can´t own one just for the fun of it.

Yes they do. I admire pacifists and people who so strongly believe in non-violence that they will not defend themselves or loved ones, but thats not me. Its to bad that human behavior strays into murder, rape and oppression. But if anyone tries to rape or murder any of my people, I will kill them, gun or not.

Its too bad that human beings oppress, enslave or commit genocides and holocausts against there fellow humans. But any form of military invasion, government oppression, or attack from oppressive authority or vigilante mob will be met with small arms fire from me.

I am sorry that these things happen, but because they do, I am forced to say "sometimes people need to get shot".





Does the year the machine was manufactured mater? How about cost? Or the color? If it is used to kill, someone dies. Why does this other shit mater? If you loose a loved one to a knife murderer or a gun murderer is your loss greater, is the crime worse?

You see what Im getting at?






Likewise, who is telling you that you must own a fire arm? Isnt this discussion about gun control? The right of civilians to me armed?

Let me guess the history of German gun control goes like this:


-Feudal Germany, only kings, lords and officials were allowed to be armed, slaves, serfs and peasant were barred from owning weapons.

-Government was forced to relinquish some of its power to the people, partly because they were armed.

-After WWI civilians were disarmed by the occupying forces.

-Jews were disarmed before the holocaust

-After WWII civilians were again disarmed by the occupying forces.

-And last, in the last several decades there have been more stringent gun laws passed against civilians owning weapons, along with most of the rest of the western nations.

Does this shit matter? look at your country, have a good look.
Gun crimes and homicides,up.

And thats the reason you carry a gun, end of story.....

You lot are too far gone, you have no idea about real living (no guns,no problems)
Keep yo guns, keep yo shit...

You should see yourself through the worlds media, It's a very sad joke.

"in the last several decades there have been more stringent gun laws passed against civilians owning weapons, along with most of the rest of the western nations"

Yeah good reason why,IT WORKS...

Have a good hard look..Seriously.

I could give a fuck if there's a huge crime/homicide rate in NY or any other place if I lived in a small place in Cali that has almost no crime. So, it's all about where you live.

Btw, where I live (neighborhood), it's peaceful. :)

Ped-R, a lot of countries historically were born through violent revolution. The birth of our nation is the only one that took place at gunpoint. Ordinary armed civilian British subjects (and a couple of lunatics, like Franklin and Adams) started the fight with nothing more than the firearms they had in their houses. Even later in the war, when the US Army became more of an organized force, they had few heavy weapons, and relied almost entirely on small arms that were or had been privately owned and superior tactics to defeat the British.

The most modern, most feared, most organized army of the day was trounced handily by a group of private citizens defending their homes and their lives with their own personal firearms.

Until that fact changes, American attitudes towards guns won't change. 234 years ago, ordinary Americans with ordinary guns fought off the tyranny and oppression of a marauding modern army. If we ever have to do it again, I (and many other Americans) prefer that we still have the means to do so.

they also slaughtered the indiginous(sp?) people of this land with their guns

In my personal opinion...
1) the security at the club were a bunch a dumbasses because they never checked those fools who shot the dj's
2) the owner of the club is in deep shit
3) my deepest condolenses for the dj's who left this earth so soon
4) safety should of been enforced

It really sucks to see this things happen but honestly since I don't know the whole story that's just my $0.02 cents on that

Yeah. It all starts with prevention.

Indigenous.

And yes, they did. Just like every other modern nation in the world was doing at the time. Some supposedly "modern" societies still do stuff like that (France, Australia, Canada, and a few others jump immediately to mind.) The Israelis and Palestinians attempt to do that to each other on a depressingly regular basis.

These Dj's were members of Poison Dart Soundsystem...very unfortunate incident. I been Dj'ing for 15 yrs and have never hurd of such a thing happening

And what happened to the Original Nations in America?

They were disarmed and forbidden to own fire arms in many instances. Perhaps they (including me, 1/8th Cherokee) would have been completely wiped out if they wernt able to secure small arms and had a familiarity with warfare. Some Original peoples mostly secure island inhabitants who had no weapons or history of warfare were completely erased leaving no one.

I'm 1/6th Toyota. :(

niiiiice akiem, my fathers grandmother was 100% cherokee, what percent does that make me?

1/8th as well
peace fam

My mom drove a Grand Cherokee....

What does that make me? *Besides an insensitive politically incorrect bastard*

:P

I have a feeling that you are just pulling that fact out of no place.
www.disastercenter.com
In the us most crimes including homicide from gun violence have been on a steady decline from a peak in about '91. In the past year or two it my have started to go back up, it remains to be seen. But it probably has more to do with the economy going to shit than any gun law. I dont see any evidence for a corolation between the murder rate and gun laws. Choice of weapon maybe.

Again look at the way gun control may only change the choice of weapon used. www.aic.gov.au
and take a look at how AUs violent crime looks like its on a steady rise:
www.aic.gov.au





nope



who me? I didnt know I was so famous!
I hardly consider myself 'american', never a patriot (more often the opposite), hardly nationalistic (except where it my work to hinder world government). I dont even believe in the good of nation states or boarders, better mob rule I guess, but hardly always. And Im sure I would present more negative rhetoric about this country then the rest of the Western press would dare. but me degrease

Really tho I do believe the joke is on the people who are giving up their weapons. Im advocating that you dont.




ok
I thought that I was...

check this out: www.telegraph.co.uk
"...found that 26 per cent of people - more than one in four - in England and Wales had been victims of crime in 1999"
"England and Wales were second only to Australia in the examination of "victimisation rates", details of which appeared in the Economist."
"The percentage of the population which suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 per cent, compared with 1.9 per cent in the United States and 0.4 per cent in Japan. "
more from the same study www.unicri.it
- Above 24% (victim of any crime in 1999): Australia, England and Wales, the Netherlands and Sweden
- 20%-24%: Canada, Scotland, Denmark, Poland, Belgium, France, and USA
- Under 20%: Finland, Catalonia (Spain), Switzerland, Portugal, Japan and Northern Ireland.

abcnews.go.com

FBI says crime drooped in '07

Interesting points.

The only thing I would say is what if the security were threatened? That happened over here at one club in town where a bunch of gunmen run up in the club pointed the machines at the bouncers and barged past?

What would you expect a bouncer to do?

I know some bouncers that are hard as nails but I also know some who are just people with a bit of muscle trying to earn some weekend cash and are not experienced enough or have the necessary people skills to deal with situations like this.

Plus how do you even know how the gun got into the club in the first place?

I was up in Canada a couple of years ago, and at a club the security guards patted you down everytime you entered/left the club. They even had a small area outside the entrance for a strip search if necessary.

I believe better security would have prevented this unfortunate incident from happening regarding the 3 DJs. But you really can't win them all.

It really comes down to scapegoating. You blame the guns for killing people like the guns had any choice in the matter. Guns aren't sentient, people are (even against popular belief). Therefore the "guns kill people" statement isn't very accurate. As stated several times in this thread, I could go mow down a crowd with my car. And is it my car's fault that it killed a chunk of that crowd? No it was the driver....or in other terms the operator. Same with the gun.

I say it comes down to scapegoating because no matter where you're from, what creed, nationality, etc no one wants to take the blame for anything. So why the hell not blame the problem on a machine?

I'm gonna take this to the extreme here for an analogy. Think tech support.
Is it the computer's fault that it contracted a virus, or is it the person who downloaded porn from the net, files off of p2p networks, etc?

Same idea applies. The human behind the machine is at fault, not the instrument that facilitated the problem/effect.

Take a child that died of S.I.D.S. (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). Is it the kid's fault that he rolled over onto his stomach to sleep? Or is it the parent's fault for not checking on their kid? This may not be the best example, but the idea and principle applies.


People need to think before they act. If they can't then they should be punished. I don't believe that everyone must suffer because of one asshole's action (disarming everyone because one asshole had a bad lapse in judgement and shot several people). I do believe that more strict and harsher punishments should be applied to these people.


-- NY DJ Slade

The weapon doesn't matter... it's the intent.

news.yahoo.com

'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed'


I don't think we have any need for a Minuteman Militia to defend us from the British anymore, we've got a pretty large military...


Fewer Guns = Fewer Deaths

the boogeyman is NOT out to get you, guns take more lives than they protect (in the hands of vigilantes).


But I'm not convincing any of you more than you're convincing any of me.

Let's just hope we can follow the lead of other progressive nations in banning most handguns and assault rifles, as well as making most guns much more dificult to obtain!

you're focusing on the wrong part.
this is the most important part


legal or illegal criminals will have guns

by the way, i don't think vigilantes are the biggest problem

Who are you? Mr. Many Personalities? Or, how many of you exactly are there?

hahahahahaha

i'd be happy to convince one of him

Michigan Militia baby

Even though it is up to the Supreme Court to interpret...

Q: What is a 'free state'?
Q: Is a monarchy a free state?
A: No, and thats what the revolution over turned, monarch rule over the colonies. And in modern extension, most of us would agree that a -military junta, -fascist or communist dictatorship, -absolute theocracy, -monopolist autocracy, or whatever type shit along those lines would not qualify as a 'Free State'. Notice that all these types of governments, and the British were not occupations from a foreign power. These including what the revolution rid us of were just systems of government, home grown.... (sure you can argue the brits were foreign and so on, but these were colonies, imperial extensions, if it were the native who fought won a revolution on the other hand...)

and so, and especially what the revolution was fought against not being an external threat, rather an internal threat to be defended against the 'security of a free state' is always threatened by its own government. It is the government what is the main threat to a 'free state', and yes, sometimes a foreign invader.

A strong national military is actual more of a danger to a free state then a defender of a free state. thats why we are supposed to have/had the 'Posse Comitatus Act' And why we have the very next 3rd Am. "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house... This regulates the US military, not a foreign military. These amendment are meant to limit and work against possible tyranny from the US government, not an invader. same with the rest of the Amendments.

Q: What is required for a 'free state'?

A: A well regulated militia.
I wont go into or try to prove that 'regulated' meant armed and ready as I believe it was meant in those days. Just the same....

Q: What is required for a 'militia'?
A: the right of the people to keep and bear Arms

'The People' clearly means the free people not controlled or in the service of, or command by the military or government.

The Constitution of the United States is meant to protect the rights of Free Peoples self rule against government tyranny by limiting the government.


SO, darius, when people say we dont need a militia of free armed people anymore because we have a military, you miss the point of who The Militia (Gangstarr, Freddie Fox, MOP) is supposed to protect us against. The Militia protects us from the government (obviously citizens will resist an invasion, thats a given and hardly need an amendment to ensure. and THATS what the military is for)

This is supposed to be a nation ruled by the People, all three branches of the government are supposed to answer to The People. And that includes the president, the chief executive and civilian commander of the military. The only way to promise this chain of command is an armed population able to, at the least to fight against a tyranny.


Now the fucking question is, why is every amendment comprising the the Bill of Rights under attack by the government? Why is there a propaganda campaign to convince people shit like...



this is a simple logic that ignores plenty of evidence to the contrary. have any of you in favor of less guns taken at least a skimming through the links Ive posted?

no.



And this is shown by what statistics? How would you even quantify such a notion? Can you count how many times a person decided not to do something because they would be up against an armed person? So saying such a thing is only empty rhetoric catch phrase.




Should we ban cars as well? They kill allot more people then guns do. Personally I think cars should be banned way before guns, they kill far more people, harm the environment to no end, and waste vast amounts of energy. In fact pollution and waste of that much energy may be doing catastrophic to damage to the whole of civilization and maybe entire human race. compare that shit to a hand gun son.

I guy kills three people with a truck, jumps out and stabs four or five others to death. Where are the cries for banning these weapons? mute

what would have been the best tactical device to stop that fucker in his tracks? your fist?

If it were Hitler telling you that disarming is a good idea would you believe him? When Hitler was telling people to disarm, didnt some people think it was a good idea? after all he was building a strong military and police to protect you, why do YOU need a gun? How many people wished they hadnt given up their weapons like some bitches?

Anytime someone is advocating less power (thats what a gun is) in your hand (as a responsible person), while not giving that power up themselves has to be looked at with some skepticism at least. You think these political figures dont keep a fucking armed goon squad at there own personal disposal? why dont they disarm their little security force first? Same reason their own monthly light bill is worth a year of yours.





please, just take a look at the links Ive posted.

I'm with this one.

Did they find and arrest this guy yet?

Check this out AKIEM....

green.yahoo.com

okay, for the 50th time. Cars & guns is a terrible analogy.

yes, the intent of the operator is important.

Owning a car does not mean you will run someone over. Chances are, you probably want some transport when you buy a car. NOT A WEAPON.
How often is a car used as a weapon? not often...

Owning a gun DOES NOT MEAN you will shoot somone. But, the reason you bought the gun is to "protect yourself" ie... shoot someone.
How often is a gun used as a weapon? ALWAYS.

dude, seriously...
So... America is going to get invaded by ground troops and it's military won't be able to handle it, so it will come down to private citizens protected by the 2nd amendment to take up arms?

L. O. L.

We're going to use our guns against the government. :)

Thats fine because I wasnt making an analogy, I was comparing machines (because they are able to be banned) that kill the most people. I can do that because the governments release all kinds of statistics that place 'cars' and 'guns' on the very same charts. So its not only me making the comparison. In other words, I didnt invent comparing cars and guns. Other things on these charts are cardiovascular disease, being the number one killer. But since you cant ban a disease, I didnt mention it.

Cars kill more people then guns.

I also compared knives because knives also kill people. In the case of Australia where guns are banned, knives become the weapon of choice (where the murder rate is increasing, unlike the US where the murder rate is decreasing)




Owning a gun does not mean that you will shoot someone (as some people seem to believe)

The reason cars arnt often used as weapons, is it makes for a poor tactical choice. If you are intent on murdering someone, you are easily identified in a car. And it is pretty difficult to get a victim to stand in one place, or get the car up into a structure where the victims often lounge.

Also its pretty hard to defend yourself with a car for the same reasons. Poor tactical choice of weapon.

And also, I dont think people really want to damage their cars. I wouldnt.

So yes, almost all vehicle deaths are unintentional. And there are too many unintentional deaths from fire arms as well. But the numbers show that cars kill far more people accidentally then guns. So it would make sense to me that the device that should be considered 'more dangerous' would be the car.

Whats a more dangerous sport, football or golf?
Obviously football more athletes are injured.

Whats a more dangerous chemical, THC or methenphedamine?
Meth of course it kills more people.

Whats a more dangerous animal, dog or cat?
Dog, cats dont kill too many people.

Whos more dangerous Mugabe or Obama?
Mugabe of course (for now)

why does the logic break right here:
Whats more dangerous a car or a gun?

Not too many people will answer a gun even though cars kill way more people then guns, and accidentally at that. Because its an accident, I would consider that way more dangerous. Cars are far more likely to run amuck, out of control and become an instrument of death.



Why will all types of people walk right in front of my car? Carrying babies, helping old ladies, whatever, the only thing stopping them from death right at that moment is my foot on the brake. Oh, but they have a big problem with me having a gun secured in my home not being pointed at anyone.

It is called conditioning. The society has been conditioned to love the greater killer of innocent people and be afraid of the lessor killer of (not always) innocent people.


Another one (not really part of the argument) what are more people more afraid of doing, flying in air plane or driving in a car?




well yes, and thats why Ive been saying that people who are for banning guns dont want me to be able to protect myself. The gun is a deterrent and a tactical advantage (or at least upgrade) against an attack. You dont think I should have that at my disposal. I do (and the constitution agrees, as long as the 13th is not repealed). Yes, I will kill someone who is trying to kill me, thats my right. Why should I be relegated to using a knife, instead of the tactical advantage of a gun. I buy knives to kill people if I cant get a gun. Should knives then be outlawed? If I knives where outlawed, I would buy a bat. I never play baseball, so yes it would be to hit someone in self defense. Should I have to prove that I play a sport to own a bat? The only reaon I would buy a bat is to hit an attacker. How about Din mAK?

Really, isnt it about saving lives? Why has it become about what inanimate object was used?

Yes, the difference between most shootings and most car accidents is that one was intended and one was not intended.

Is it worse to die from falling off a building accidentally or being pushed off a building purposefully? Same results, you die. You realize that if you put up a rail it will cut down on the accidental deaths. But if you cut off my arms, I will still push a motherfucker (just with my torso)

Yes. Obviously imperial America is well defended by a professional military and it is unlikely. But it has not always been this way, and it might not always be this way.

But more importantly citizens have the right to defend themselves against a domestic military tyranny.

Or defend themselves with arms, period.

Go read the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution. All these amendments are supposed to protect the people from the government.

do it, it takes two minutes

yeah, Ive seen a couple stories. I wonder how efficient they are. at least no fumes.

but, it wont stop them from killing people (even if its not made to murder)

I too think they should ban cars and force everyone to drive hydrogen fuel cells and electric type cars.

what if you took a hydro car, paint it murder black, roll cage, solid tires, enforced bumpers, bullet proof windows and paneling, stripped all the seats and replaced the stereo with a scanner. skull and bones on the, would that be ok?

that would be one badass electric automobile.

Like deathproof??

actually like murderous
(protection for the driver, only)

this addresses the point:
'the problem with a gun is that its made to kill'

so would this car be
sitting in the garage waiting silently for the owner to, er need it.

damn dude. thats freakin crazy.

Nice movie idea. Wait. I think that was already done... kinda.


Christine.

in the states you guys don´t have to have your cars checked, right?
in germany it´s a pain in the ass. you can´t do anything with your vehicle without having it checked and approved!

I din't mean deathproof literally, I was talkin about the tarentino movie(from grindhouse) which has a stuntcar pretty much the same as you described

It depends on what you do to your car. You can customize it but you have to know what's legal and what's not.

deathproof, yeah by the time I added the skull and bones that image did enter my mind.

I guess gun controllers would like to outlaw the murderdout paint job on a car because its scary



laws, I got pulled over and ticketed by a pig for having a green pine tree air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror, so....



slaves are dissarmed

www.rawstory.com

www.rawstory.com
deathproof


Watchwww.youtube.com

texas man shoots two burglars

my bad, deathprooof:
Watchyoutube.com

by the way, Jungle Julia(the chick ridin shotgun, with her leg out the window) is a radio DJ in the movie . . .

skipped it at first, guess I should run rent that shit now!

anyway tho, theres an example (only fictional) of a car 'made to kill'.

The question is: why when someone takes a car and intends to use it for murder, no one talks about banning them? But people want to ban guns because they can be used to kill, whats the difference?

Oh yeah, there are lots of good uses for cars. You dont want to deprive people of that right?

Exactly the way we should not be deprived of the self defense options that a gun gives you.





Now if you ask me, this idiot down in Texas is a different story. But suppose he runs out the house jumps in his pickup truck and runs the two guys over? Same result two men dead over probably some crap in a bag. Yet no one would talk about banning TRUCKS.

Look at the way the reporter subtly draws the line: if you are for the right to be armed then you support this guy.

That is a technic used constantly to shape your opinion, but most people dont even recognize what is being feed you.

If the guy ran out with a hunting knife or a bat or an ax or a brick would there be ANY fucking question about banning any of these devices?







so I hear that the supreme court is about to hand out a 2nd Am ruling. From the Washington Post "...could settle the decades-old debate over whether the Second Amendment grants individuals the right to own firearms." Notice the way that bullshit assumes and pre-supposes that the Constitution is what grants you your rights. WRONG. I hate that bullshit. Your rights dont come from the Constitution, they come from Nature/God/Self. The Constitution organizes the government, then puts limits on it infringing on your rights with the Bill of Rights. Maybe the decision will somehow say that 'people' does not mean 'individuals', but rather is a collective. A collective being the government. Thus it is the governments who holds the right. How would that make sense with the rest of the Bill Of Rights? For example, maybe that means that its actually the government that has the 'freedom of speech'?

{quote] Maybe the decision will somehow say that 'people' does not mean 'individuals', but rather is a collective. A collective being the government. Thus it is the governments who holds the right. How would that make sense with the rest of the Bill Of Rights? For example, maybe that means that its actually the government that has the 'freedom of speech'?

i hope the gov't doesn't see this

ooops

I never heard of this movie, but I dug the clip. I kept staring at the girl riding shotgun's sexy foot watching her move it back and forth. I found myself wishing I could see them both...

Then it turns out it's a Tarantino film--go figure!

right, but I think that is where some want to take it. a situation where the individual has only one way to exercise a right, through the government. Plenty of people believe that it is the government that gives them their rights in the first place. It would be a natural backward progression. Early in history only the king had rights. He licensed these rights to his subjects. But now, it is generally recognized by most that individuals are sovereign and only give up that sovereignty through contract or transgression.

the biggest mistake that free people make is being tricked into believing that their own natural rights are given to them, bestowed on them, like a gift from the government. NO, the governments roll is to protect the natural rights that you were born with. You bestow that power, you give that right to the government. THE PROBLEM, is that the government over steps its bound because it has all the weapons and wealth and tries to act like it gives you your rights. It is about who has the weapons. And the main way, the final way for any of us to protect ourselves from tyranny is in fact personal arms and improvised weaponry.

So the supreme court actually makes the right decision (so it would seem) and only just getting by, 5 to 4 against. Maybe another 20 years and it will be up again.

if u got a foot fetish you should definatly see the movie, i think tarentino has one too

Never in my life have i heard something that shook me like this. With the exception of Scott La Rock and JMJ the dj was usually the last person that had to worry about dodgin bullets...

I guess nobodys safe huh?

actually, i'm kinda surprised something like this didn't happen sooner, club dj's are often assholes(myself included), especially towards guys

Oh yeah and one I seen about a year ago was hangin off mixmaster Mikes arse like a a turd he would rather forget, tha little fucker did'nt seem to get the message but. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE FUCKFACE. Canberra Dj's ain't shit, unless they care bout the music, then they fuckin rock.

Image versus style = you lookin like a complete wank. but least ya look cool to some underage chicks, onya rockspider..