Well if the sentence was locked up for life then it would have to be first degree murder, wouldn't it?

Like Billy Zane in Titanic, Livia makes her own luck.

The lawyer / dubious lawyer catfight in this thread is awesome by the way.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4...wqjeo6_250.gif

More catfish than cat fight.

:hehe: quite.

It's a bit adorable though. Let the children play, Livia :nono:

(Funnily enough, I originally wrote that last post on my phone and it autocorrected "catfight" to "catfish". Is this what Kirk calls synchronicity?)

(Funnily enough #2... the Titanic / Zane reference in the last post... I've just realised that just after he says that quote about "I make my own luck", his bodyguard guy says "so do I", referencing the fact that he carries a gun. Which ties into this thread! D: Synchronicigasm.)

You're scaring me now, TS.

And guns are scary too. That's it, get Kirk in here, I'm converting to this synchronicity **** as of now.

Them Yanks still think it's 'The Wild West'

One day they'll evolve into civilised Human Beings, but I don't know what day that will be.

The Second Amendment, the right to bear arms was added during the time of the Wild West, when it was okay to own slaves... and they're still defending it! Madness...

Hey wannashag, nice to see you!

I would never let someone bring a gun into my house.

its not really about that Livia, the second amendment was added because there was no strong government after the british, and we had open borders. so we needed militias to be able to defend themselves against the british in the north, the spanish(mexicans) in the south, and against Indian tribes, there was no way for the US army to be covering all of those bases back then. We needed militias to protect this country because we had ever expanding borders and really, back then it was up to the American people to protect their own towns. there was no way for the US military to get anywhere quickly and protect our borders back then. it would take a month before any kind of federal help could respond if there was any kind of invasion from the british canadians or the spanish mexicans so we needed to rely on the american people themselves to protect our borders and land. It's much like the swiss now, they have guns in every house, because they need ordinary citizens to protect the country incase any one tries to invade.

I've always thought the second amendment was pointless in this day and age as, from what I remember, a lot of why it exists is so that the average american can arm themselves against tyrannical governments but what good is that these days when things like drone strikes exist?

A gun isn't going to save you from that.

Stop baiting and getting personal. If you were anybody else you'd have got a warning.

Completely agree with Dezzy.

Maybe if they had stricter controls on the type of firearm people could keep, and also on the way they're kept. I have a gun, with a licence of course. I keep it in a locked metal cabinet, unloaded and at any time the police can rock up and ask to see it. So as much as I'd like to stick it through the letterbox at people, I am unable...

:laugh2: Ahem... Petard and Hoisted? :laugh:

i think these days it's more about the people in small towns who really don't feel like they get much support from the government anyways. they live in small country towns and they feel like they've been protecting themselves and taking care of themselves this long, why should the government now tell them that they are protected.

and honestly i don't blame them, the fact is America really is built by all these small towns that don't ask for help from the government, and they don't have these problems of violence that big american cities have, so when you tell them that the government is taking away their guns, they don't understand it, because they've been protecting themselves and running their own towns for so long, what right does the government have to come in and all of a sudden take their guns away when they aren't the ones having problems...

it's mostly big cities with big gun violence problems and some isolated incidents in suburbs... so to take their guns away feels like the government is restricting them even though they've been protecting themselves for hundreds of years...

I can see it from both sides.

that being said, i don't like guns, i've never owned a gun, i'd never buy a gun, i don't want to buy a gun, so i have no problem with the government taking guns away. i just don't believe that there's any way to take all the guns out of America, Pandora's box is already open.

I get no slack cut for me round here. Everything I asked you was a genuine question.

Okay.

I think it was your good self who used that excellent maxim: 'Once a bell's been rung, you can't unring it'?

Well the trouble with the USA and its 'Gun Laws' is that too many bells have been rung for too long a period, and repealing (pun intended :laugh:) the 2nd Amendment would be nigh on impossible. Even if they tried to amend the amendment it would be hard to achieve - they'd have to work like the clappers (pun intended :laugh:)

if you really look at the gun violence numbers in the country, it's not about the young white males that go on shooting spree's... the vast majority is something else entirely...but for some reason the gun control people like to focus on the cases of the young white male mass murderers...

the fact is the narrative of the young white male shooter getting guns, it's pretty rare and doesn't contribute much to the larger numbers of gun violence in this country...

If people really want to get guns off the streets they need to start focussing on the other statistics...

I think a big problem is that too many Americans believe that gun control = taking all the guns away when it's more about making sure that they don't fall into the wrong hands. Most gun owners are responsible and wouldn't be affected by any changes to the laws because the laws would be targeted at people who shouldn't own a gun in the first place.

yea, but the gun violence problem is much bigger than that Dezzy, and when you look at the real statistics, it's about people using illegal guns in big cities or suburbs. it's not about the average joe with guns in their house, it's about gang violence, domestic violence, and suicides.

I agree with what you have said but the second amendmant was written in 1791 and Thomas Jefferson was very specific with the way it was worded. It went, "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."

There are still militia's within the USA but the majority of those who no longer carry a musket but a whole arsenal of weapon are not part of a militia and they are certainly not well regulated.

Yes, the Swiss army is a militia in the truest sense of the word. Whilst every Swiss militia man/woman has an army weapon at home he is not allowed ammunition and he has to prove that his weapon is kept safely under lock and key and that only he has access to it. He's is not permitted to carry his weapon unless he's called into military service. What the Swiss militia are permitted to do with their weapon is clean and maintain it - only.

Thanks for that DR very informative I didn't know that about the Swiss. The gun laws in America do need tightening no question, gun obsessives hiding behind that out moded law is silly. It does nothing now but place people in danger, it's basically still state supported murder.
You can have guns here as long as they are licenced and/or are used for hunting as part of a club I think, so it's not like nobody would be able to have one. Knowing who owns what gun and it authorized to use it seems sensible.
Yes there will be criminals it won't stop them having illegal guns obv, same here.

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ng_Law_v13.pdf

You can have a shotgun in this country so long as it's not an automatic, with a licence obviously. You don't need to belong to a club, every farmer I know has a shotgun. You cannot have a handgun even if you belong to a club, even if you're representing this country in the Olympics, you have to train abroad. It's very strict. It's a ridiculous system. Sportsmen should be allowed to follow their chosen sport, with regulation of course, and criminal gun crime needs to be leaned on much more heavily with longer statutory sentences for even possessing one.