Guns, Rifles, Pistols, Weapons... - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

BusterBunny · 04-07-2007, 03:46 PM

50 cal

Webby · 04-07-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

lol - you really believe that and call others brainwashed.

*eye roll* - it's almost embarrassing to witness this level of ... dunno...

Notice everything seems to be related to politics in some way? They could make they act of taking a piss a political issue *lol*

frank7799 · 04-07-2007, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

One of my buddies was telling me about the training he had to go thru just to fish there . . . I think they have really gone over the top with animal rights.

It has nothing to do with animal rights. It´s simply to protect the owner of the fishing grounds or - as far as hunting is concerned - to prevent that everybody handles weapons or goes hunting.

You have to preconceive that handling weapons is totally different in the US and in Europe. So it´s not a big deal for Europeans to settle for not having the right to use or posess weapons without special licenses.

The right of hunting was reserved for the aristocracy in the middle ages in Europe. This right migrated to the government and it´s still there today.

uno · 04-07-2007, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacuna

All governments should have an inherent fear of their subjects. That's why the Founders put the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights -- to help keep the government honest.

Look how well that has worked.

Webby · 04-07-2007, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uno

Look how well that has worked.

Sad stuff... other factor is any govt is there to *serve* and be accountable. There is a sad lacking of that - to the level that some serious asskicking is needed. And it's not just a problem with the US govt.

baddog · 04-07-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

yeah, a driving license is easier to get - it's a little absurd

I found it amusing the process they have to go thru once the fish is caught to minimize its discomfort before hitting the grill

uno · 04-07-2007, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I found it amusing the process they have to go thru once the fish is caught to minimize its discomfort before hitting the grill

It's ok to eat fish cause they don't got any feelings.

baddog · 04-07-2007, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4yadult

It has nothing to do with animal rights. It´s simply to protect the owner of the fishing grounds or - as far as hunting is concerned - to prevent that everybody handles weapons or goes hunting.

Oh really? How is it protecting the owner of the fishing grounds to force the fisherman to smash in the head of the fish immediately after being caught?

Is it because German fish are so ferocious?

sarettah · 04-07-2007, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uno

It's ok to eat fish cause they don't got any feelings.

Tell that to the fish

sarettah · 04-07-2007, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Is it because German fish are so ferocious?

Nazi Fish??? http://www.metacafe.com/watch/425571/nazi_fish/

frank7799 · 04-07-2007, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Oh really? How is it protecting the owner of the fishing grounds to force the fisherman to smash in the head of the fish immediately after being caught?

Is it because German fish are so ferocious?

Well, yes. German fish is something special.

There are many regulations in German laws - some more or less needless. But there is an intention. And the reason is more or less the protection, though there are of course many other rules. Fishing without license for example is liable to penalty and you´ll face up to 2 years in prison or fine.

So protection of animals is part of the exam for the license, but not the reason for that specific law.

baddog · 04-07-2007, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m4yadult

Well, yes. German fish is something special.

There are many regulations in German laws - some more or less needless. But there is an intention. And the reason is more or less the protection, though there are of course many other rules. Fishing without license for example is liable to penalty and you´ll face up to 2 years in prison or fine.

So protection of animals is part of the exam for the license, but not the reason for that specific law.

I don't know of anywhere that doesn't require you to have a license to fish, or have daily limits, or seasons to go after certain types of fish. That is to protect the speciaes.

Smacking the fish in the head so it doesn't suffocate is something else though.

sarettah · 04-07-2007, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Smacking the fish in the head so it doesn't suffocate is something else though.

But it does give the fish a fair chance to fight back

frank7799 · 04-07-2007, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

I don't know of anywhere that doesn't require you to have a license to fish, or have daily limits, or seasons to go after certain types of fish. That is to protect the speciaes.

Smacking the fish in the head so it doesn't suffocate is something else though.

I agree. BTW I´m not fishing, I only read the explanatory statement for that law cause I was interested in why it was enacted. Animal protection wasn´t mentioned.

MaDalton · 04-07-2007, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarettah

But it does give the fish a fair chance to fight back

nah, you eliminated all chances of fairness by keeping the guns to yourself and giving none to the animals

frank7799 · 04-07-2007, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarettah

But it does give the fish a fair chance to fight back

Depending on the fish, yes.

sarettah · 04-07-2007, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

nah, you eliminated all chances of fairness by keeping the guns to yourself and giving none to the animals

Nah, you don't use guns for fishing... sheez.

You do use them for frogging though

dynastoned · 04-07-2007, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

my honest opinion:

no one needs any weapons, no individual person, no organization, no country.

if no one had weapons no one would need weapons

that's it

now flame away, you gunlovers

you will always need weapons no matter what, period. if you didn't need weapons you would not be human.

just because you live in a nice house and in a wealthy country you think weapons serve no purpose. well id like for you to think how you got there. how your country got to where it is. how you have the free will to do as you please and make a good life for yourself.

it's because you fought for all that long before you were born. you can't live nice without someone else paying the price and that is a fact.

THINK about it. if everyone threw down every single gun, missile, knife, anything today. what would happen? haha now do you get it?

all the poor people would come to your fucking neighborhood and they would fucking mob in the streets and start taking all you rich fuckers out one by one. they would take your house, your cars, your wife, everything.

same fucking concept with countries. you live next to a third world country? you think they want to be able to drink clean water too? FUCK YEAH they'd march right past all your unarmed guards and they would fucking get that water.

ITS HUMAN NATURE. get over it. its a dog eat dog world you fucking morons THATS LIFE. PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD THE END.

for every good thing that happens in the world there will always be a bad thing. for you morons with no concept of that keep crying about how bad guns are. you are only fooling yourself.

Grapesoda · 04-07-2007, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

my honest opinion:

no one needs any weapons, no individual person, no organization, no country.

if no one had weapons no one would need weapons

that's it

now flame away, you gunlovers

if no one ever fucked we wouldn't need rubbers!!!

Webby · 04-07-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

nah, you eliminated all chances of fairness by keeping the guns to yourself and giving none to the animals

Just a sampling of idiots who think they need guns to screw up animals...

Had a tapir shot on our patch in the last year - the "perps" were macho idiots from another country who thought they were "big game hunting" (forget tresspassing) and they apparently used AK47's to shoot the tapir.

Now.. a tapir is a rare creature and in some areas on an endangered list. It is totally harmless and kinda shy (just digs up a load of soil). To replace that tapir it's gonna cost about $15-20K and found two in care at the moment, but depends on what others think - it may be better not to move em on to the land - will see.

At the same time as killing the tapir, they also shot three monkey's - again, totally harmless creatures.

Not saying everyone who holds a weapon has that mentality - but it's not uncommon. They are basically unfit to hold any weapon. Now we got rangers/guards who are armed and with instructions to use up to three warning rounds, then shoot any armed "poachers" as they judge fit. It may affect the tourist industry - but screw em.

Since then, there as been only one "intrusion" - armed again and also accompanied by dogs. I was not there at the time, but they were warned and sadly two dogs shot (and a couple of others "lost" and passed over into care). The perps on this occasion elected to disappear.

Bottom line.. screw around with guns and there is likely to be injury or worse.

04-07-2007, 03:46 PM	#51
BusterBunny perverted justice decoy Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: unborn still in the womb connected via blackberry Posts: 19,291	50 cal __________________ my sig caught gonoherpasyphilaids and died