Gun rights

[Bryan]

Since this topic seems to be mostly about football, here's something to chew for Bryan:

You're too late, my friend: that's already been completely chewed and digested by me. There's never been any question that soccer is the world's most popular sport, something I've acknowledged since Day One. I expect that to gradually change in coming generations, though.

 

[powersam]

Anyway, they were talking about motorsports and they were saying how it takes 3 years for the Finns to get full drivers license and they have to pass an exam on slippery surface, etc. Basically, the show implied that the Finnish SISU makes the Finns brilliant at motorsports.

Hehe, well Brazil seems to churn out amazing drivers and they have almost no road rules (none that anyone takes seriously) and 2/3 of the drivers on the road have no license. It was probably a junket, they got their expenses paid as long as they were complimentary to Finland and it's denizens.

Here in Australia it takes 3 years to get a full license, and look at Mark Webber uke:

 

[Hammy070]

Since this topic seems to be mostly about football, here's something to chew for Bryan:

And yeah, it's a crying shame that in Finland ice hockey is actually the most popular sport. Ice hockey is a poor sport, very poor.

What intrigues me most is why Bhutan's national sport is archery :-\

And why half of some islands have baseball on one side, and football on the other. There's also a horse racing colour on the legend, but can't find the country. Probably a tiny island the size of a pixel and can't spot it!

 

[ghg]

And yeah, it's a crying shame that in Finland ice hockey is actually the most popular sport. Ice hockey is a poor sport, very poor.

You probably know Top Gear? In last week's episode one of the presenters, James May, went to Finland to learn how to drive fast. His personal tutor was Mika Hakkinen. It was nice to see Mika enjoying life. I used to be a supporter of his.

Anyway, they were talking about motorsports and they were saying how it takes 3 years for the Finns to get full drivers license and they have to pass an exam on slippery surface, etc. Basically, the show implied that the Finnish SISU makes the Finns brilliant at motorsports.

If you want to see it for yourself, go to pirate bay and just torrent it. Top Gear is normally very disrespectful of other nations, but they were very complimentary towards the Finns.

Yeah I always liked Häkkinen. I haven't followed Formula 1 at all for years since he retired. In Finland he's also known for his insane dry humour and oneliners. Kimi Räikkönen is a right c***, though. Well it doesn't exactly take 3 years to get the driving license here, it takes 3 years to get a permanent license. You'll get a temporary license first and if you don't f*** up during that time and pass the final driving test, you'll get a permanent license. Those are called the 1st and 2nd phase of driving school.

 

[ali777]

Hehe, well Brazil seems to churn out amazing drivers and they have almost no road rules (none that anyone takes seriously) and 2/3 of the drivers on the road have no license. It was probably a junket, they got their expenses paid as long as they were complimentary to Finland and it's denizens.

Here in Australia it takes 3 years to get a full license, and look at Mark Webber uke:

Finland has more F1 world champions per population than any other country :whistle:

Webber is good, but not brilliant. Let's put it this way, there are only 20 F1 drivers with a racing seat, so all of them must be exceptionally good. I'd say Webber is probably in the top 10, but he doesn't drive one of the top 2 cars. We'll never know how he compares against the guys who win WC.

 

[ali777]

Since this topic seems to be mostly about football, here's something to chew for Bryan:

And yeah, it's a crying shame that in Finland ice hockey is actually the most popular sport. Ice hockey is a poor sport, very poor.

What intrigues me most is why Bhutan's national sport is archery :-\

And why half of some islands have baseball on one side, and football on the other. There's also a horse racing colour on the legend, but can't find the country. Probably a tiny island the size of a pixel and can't spot it!

Because they like archery? What's wrong with enjoying archery?

Well, the obvious answer to your other question is that it's a two nation island. I knew one of them is the Dominican Republic. I had to look up the name of the other country, it's Haiti and the name of the island is Hispaniola.

I was expecting to find horse racing somewhere in Central Asia, in one of the ex Soviet *istan countries.

 

[optimus prime]

It’s like a game of Risk. Now football needs to take the gray country in Africa and it has a continent. With the reinforcement it receives next go it will conquer Europe and South America...before you know it American Football won’t even exist...MWAHAHAHAHA

 

[powersam]

Hehe, well Brazil seems to churn out amazing drivers and they have almost no road rules (none that anyone takes seriously) and 2/3 of the drivers on the road have no license. It was probably a junket, they got their expenses paid as long as they were complimentary to Finland and it's denizens.

Here in Australia it takes 3 years to get a full license, and look at Mark Webber uke:

Finland has more F1 world champions per population than any other country :whistle:

Webber is good, but not brilliant. Let's put it this way, there are only 20 F1 drivers with a racing seat, so all of them must be exceptionally good. I'd say Webber is probably in the top 10, but he doesn't drive one of the top 2 cars. We'll never know how he compares against the guys who win WC.

See the thing is, if he was good he'd be in a good car. Plus it's not all about picking the right line on a corner, giving good feedback to the engineers and keeping the car on the road and running are equally important. Sadly Webber has shown he he's great at breaking cars. At least Sato was entertaining as he fried engines and crashed into barricades.

 

[ali777]

You are comparing Webber to Sato?

Sato -> :woot: nfire: :laugh: He's definitely entertaining to say the least.

Due to Aussie's comments about Britain, now we are supposed to be mean to you: viewtopic.php?f=65&t=49581&start=20

I have to agree with you about Webber, he's useless. I can't remember the last time Australia had a decent driver. Britain, on the other hand, has had a few decent drivers. I was fortunate enough to shake Hill's hand after he won the WC in the 1990s. I bumped into him on a tobacco promotion campaign. Nice chap.

It wasn't that long ago, but 10-12 years feel like a lifetime in sports. A driver promoting tobacco would be so unacceptable today. But at that time tobacco manufacturers were the main sponsors and all the drivers were openly promoting cigarettes :shakehead:

 

[badasshairday III]

I'm sure you guys heard about the tragedy in Mumbai. It made me think, if India allowed citizens the right to bear arms, those fuckers would of been blasted with the quickness before murdering 200 people. The cops don't even have guns over there.

 

[s.a.f]

I'm sure you guys heard about the tragedy in Mumbai. It made me think, if India allowed citizens the right to bear arms, those fuckers would of been blasted with the quickness before murdering 200 people. The cops don't even have guns over there.

Yes absolutley 200 people would have been saved in 1 incident.

Just a shame that about 5000 people would have probably been killed in 5000 other separate incidents. :whistle:

 

[badasshairday III]

Point taken. However, the cops should have guns. They could have put an end to it at the train stations if they had pistols to fight back with. Instead most of them ran the hell out of there to save their lives.

 

[ClayShaw]

And just for the record. I'm not a hardcore NRA guy. As a matter of fact I don't own a gun... yet. I'm just arguing that the right to bear arms should not be eliminated. But I do believe that ammunition should cost about 50$ a bullet to keep people from being to trigger happy.

Thats the problem. "The right to bear arms." What are "arms"? Rifles? Handguns? Tanks? ICBM's? Either the gov't can regulate the sale of "arms", or we can all own shoulder fired missiles. That is my main problem with the gun crowd. If you're arguing that the gov't can't put reasonable controls on the ownership of guns, then you're arguing that I can buy a tank, because that is most certainly an "arm".
The argument that we will need to be armed in the event that the gov't turns tyrannical just doesn't hold water in my opinion, not to mention the fact that the people making that argument frequently ignore the fact that our last right wing government wiretapped American citizens without a warrant.... Anyways, if it comes to the point where the citizens are in a fight with the gov't, who ever has the military on their side, be it the citizens or the gov't, will win. Does anyone really think they're going to take out the US Air Force with a handgun?

 

[ClayShaw]

I'm sure you guys heard about the tragedy in Mumbai. It made me think, if India allowed citizens the right to bear arms, those fuckers would of been blasted with the quickness before murdering 200 people. The cops don't even have guns over there.

To assume that people with little to no training, in a crowd, in what amounts to a combat situation, will react and fire appropriately, like a SWAT team, is a big leap for me.

 

[Old Baldy]

And just for the record. I'm not a hardcore NRA guy. As a matter of fact I don't own a gun... yet. I'm just arguing that the right to bear arms should not be eliminated. But I do believe that ammunition should cost about 50$ a bullet to keep people from being to trigger happy.

Thats the problem. "The right to bear arms." What are "arms"? Rifles? Handguns? Tanks? ICBM's? Either the gov't can regulate the sale of "arms", or we can all own shoulder fired missiles. That is my main problem with the gun crowd. If you're arguing that the gov't can't put reasonable controls on the ownership of guns, then you're arguing that I can buy a tank, because that is most certainly an "arm".
The argument that we will need to be armed in the event that the gov't turns tyrannical just doesn't hold water in my opinion, not to mention the fact that the people making that argument frequently ignore the fact that our last right wing government wiretapped American citizens without a warrant.... Anyways, if it comes to the point where the citizens are in a fight with the gov't, who ever has the military on their side, be it the citizens or the gov't, will win. Does anyone really think they're going to take out the US Air Force with a handgun?

The US military would stand absolutely no chance against 200 million armed Americans should such a nightmare scenario occur. Even military experts know that (and have said that on numerous occasions over the years).

In any event Clay, your anti-gun philosophy has been totally rejected by the majority of Americans. Thank God!!

Rifles, handguns and shotguns are reasonable firearms for ordinary citizens to own. How in the world could anyone disagree with that is beyond me. Unless you like to live like sheep.

Since you know so little about the 2nd Amendment let me explain the elementary fundamentals:

First off, ordnance has never been considered a part of the 2nd Amendment. Therefore, your "tank" red herring analogy goes nowhere. Tanks, cannons, bombs, etc., are not arms. They are ordnance for pete's sake.

No one of sound mind has ever said prohibiting felons or mentally ill people from owning firearms is unerasonable.

The right of self-defense and guarding against tyranny is what the 2nd Amendment is all about. How any rational thinking person could disagree with allowing law abiding citizens those rights is illogical and silly IMHO. Unless, of course, you favor living in a police state.

 

[cuebald]

I wouldn't mind myself an MG42
can you own those in America?

 

[HughJass]

The right of self-defense and guarding against tyranny is what the 2nd Amendment is all about.

owning a gun is no substitute for organising mass protest,an education and a ballot box when it comes to defending democracy



just my 2c

 

[Old Baldy]

No voting, etc., is the way to go IMHO. God forbid there is ever an armed conflict akin to a civil war. I'd hate to see that.

Alot of us think tyrants can't come into power with an armed citizenry.

 

[Old Baldy]

I wouldn't mind myself an MG42
can you own those in America?

With a special license from the BATF and about $25,000 you could own one.