Cyclist shot in airgun attack

[ritcho]

[snip]

and you think that preventing a percentage of rapes isn't worth doing? what
does that say about you, just how ****ed up do you have to be to think that
your sad ideology is worth letting that happen to women, when it will
prevent some rapes and deter others?

Tell me Anita Cobby would have regretted carrying a pistol.

Hmm... imagine arming everyone so they are not likely to be victims of common assault (or worse, in the case of sexual assault). Instead of the risk of assault, we can all face the risk of a shootout if we 'rub someone up the wrong way'.

Of course, if we're all trained in the safe handling and proper use of handguns, as well as keep up that training by shooting regularly and attending training courses... oh forget it - it's much easier just to restrict access to guns. Yes, we will increase our risk of assault, but that is why public policy involves trade-offs.

Ritch.

PS - invoking the name of a murder victim as some kind of debating point is in poor taste and unfortunately, didn't help your case.

PPS - if you want the last word, go ahead. Try it without swear words, at least.

 

[Resound]

"qtq" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> L'acrobat wrote:
>> Because idiots like you convince others (like my friend who was
> raped) that
>> the world is warm and fluffy and nice. then they have to learn the
> hard way.
>> Why does it bother you that some of us prefer to deal with the real
> world?
>
> You're the one not living in the real world, wacko-boy.
>
> What proportion of rapes do you think having women carry guns will
> prevent? [hint: it's in the single digit percent range.]

and you think that preventing a percentage of rapes isn't worth doing? what
does that say about you, just how ****ed up do you have to be to think that
your sad ideology is worth letting that happen to women, when it will
prevent some rapes and deter others?

Tell me Anita Cobby would have regretted carrying a pistol.

I've tried to resist feeding the troll, but...

The reason I favour gun control is quite simple. Take a walk around your local shopping centre. One of the big ones. Do it on a Saturday morning. Look at all the mouth breathers screaming at their kids/spouses/whatever. Go back outside and watch them in the car park. Feel the love in their frothing screams as you cycle out of the car park and onto the road. Or alternatively, catch a bus with them. Now imagine them armed. You might be able to appropriately store, carry and use a firearm, (although you seem WAAAAY too willing to use it) but not everyone is. There is no way I want to share a public space with someone who just might back up his road rage temper tantrum with lethal force. Especially when there's every chance that, as I said, and as you yourself pointed out, if you don't train with these things, you're not likely to hit what you're aiming at. And don't think for a second that everyone who purchases a pistol is going to practice assiduously with it. If you find yourself thinking that, go back into that shopping centre and look around a bit more. Incidentally, don't even think about implying in any way that my reluctance to see firearms in the hands of the general public is in any way condoning rape. I've known way too many rape victims to think that way. Making firearms legal means that until someone commits a crime with one, they can wander around with one all they like. I would suggest that someone who purchases a gun with the express intention of commiting a crime with it is more likely to spend time using it and practicing with it than a potential rape victim who doesn't honestly believe that it'll ever happen to them. Guess what...firearms can be used by rapists too! Who'd have thought? And guess what, the person who's ready to pull out their gun or who has already pulled out their gun is going to have a distinct advantage over someone who isn't expecting to need their firearm at all. Funnily enough, I don't see any of this giving the victim in these situations any kind of advantage at all. The variety of violent idiot we have here does enough damage with cricket bats and machetes. There's no way I'm going to propose that we tell them that they can carry a ranged weapon as well. And before you start bleating about criminals already carrying firearms, they generally don't here. They know that if they get caught with them that there's no viable explanation that they can come up with, so, organised crime aside, they just don't use them. Ask yourself whether schools needing metal detectors is a good thing. I don't fear walking or riding after dark. If people were allowed to carry guns in public, I'd be a LOT more wary.

 

[L'acrobat]

"hippy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com> wrote
>> Or to put it another way, you are a sad bullshitter.
>
> Some interesting threads you got L'acrobat... maybe you should just ride?
> http://groups.google.com.au/groups?q=L'acrobat&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wg
>

Its funny how its always the lefties who think they have a right to dictate
what a person can REPLY to...

 

[L'acrobat]

"ritcho" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> L'acrobat Wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> and you think that preventing a percentage of rapes isn't worth doing?
>> what
>> does that say about you, just how ****ed up do you have to be to think
>> that
>> your sad ideology is worth letting that happen to women, when it will
>> prevent some rapes and deter others?
>>
>> Tell me Anita Cobby would have regretted carrying a pistol.
>
> Hmm... imagine arming everyone so they are not likely to be victims of
> common assault (or worse, in the case of sexual assault). Instead of
> the risk of assault, we can all face the risk of a shootout if we 'rub
> someone up the wrong way'.

Yet in the county in the USA where it is compulsory to carry a gun, they
don't have this problem. or a significant crime rate.

>
> Of course, if we're all trained in the safe handling and proper use of
> handguns, as well as keep up that training by shooting regularly and
> attending training courses... oh forget it - it's much easier just to
> restrict access to guns. Yes, we will increase our risk of assault, but
> that is why public policy involves trade-offs.

we will increase our risk of assault, rape and murder, all because we
pretend that restricting access to firearms helps (in spite of the latest
stats that have shown no significant change in violent crime rates since
before the gun buyback). ie we have traded our abilty to defend ourselves
for no gain.

>
> Ritch.
>
> PS - invoking the name of a murder victim as some kind of debating
> point is in poor taste and unfortunately, didn't help your case.

Really? of course it is poor taste to suggest that a woman who was abducted,
tortured, repeatedly sexually assaulted and then murdered would have been
better off armed. because you can't suggest that she would have been worse
off, so try to exclude the facts on the grounds of "taste" - not a winning
strategy.

 

[ritcho]

[snip]

we will increase our risk of assault, rape and murder, all because we
pretend that restricting access to firearms helps (in spite of the latest
stats that have shown no significant change in violent crime rates since
before the gun buyback). ie we have traded our abilty to defend ourselves
for no gain.

>
> Ritch.
>
> PS - invoking the name of a murder victim as some kind of debating
> point is in poor taste and unfortunately, didn't help your case.

Really? of course it is poor taste to suggest that a woman who was abducted,
tortured, repeatedly sexually assaulted and then murdered would have been
better off armed. because you can't suggest that she would have been worse
off, so try to exclude the facts on the grounds of "taste" - not a winning
strategy.

We have traded our ability to defend ourselves in exchange for a reduced risk of being the perpetrator of a gun crime. Policy makers weigh up these risks.

It is not possible for Ms Cobby to have been worse off under _any_ circumstances - she was killed horribly. Any change in the course of events would have been better, or at least no worse.

However, you posed a syllogism not a fact: If she were armed, she would have been better off, therefore, we should all be armed, so we can all be better off. You're bright enough to know better. It was in poor taste for two reasons - the first is the barbaric imagery, but more importantly, it was misleading.

Ritch.

 

[hippy]

"L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com
> "hippy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > "L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com> wrote
> >> Or to put it another way, you are a sad bullshitter.
> >
> > Some interesting threads you got L'acrobat... maybe you should just
ride?
> > http://groups.google.com.au/groups?q=L'acrobat&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wg
>
> Its funny how its always the lefties who think they have a right to
dictate
> what a person can REPLY to...

Dictate? What's a "leftie"? I'm right-handed...

hippy

 

[hippy]

"L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com
> (A Altbeker, Guns and public safety: Gun crime and self-defence in
Alexandra
> and Bramley, January - April 1997, research commissioned by Gun-Free SA,
> 1998. - yes that appears REALLY unbiased - commissioned by "gun-free SA").
>
> Only if you are not prepared to use it, training with the weapon is the
> answer.

I just wouldn't be able to fit it in, what with work and
cycle training.. sorry.. maybe when I retire? ;-)

> As was shown post WW1 with military training swapping from bullseye
targets
> to human shaped targets.
>
> Google doesn't beat subject knowledge, but keep trying.

I don't have to.. you haven't provided any evidence for 'your' case,
commissioned by "pro-gun SA" or otherwise.. keep trying..

> >> No, you just hope it will, if he or they are better trained or better
> >> prepared than you, you won't fix a thing. a 9mm will fix anyone.
> >
> > Unless they are better trained and take it off you before you can
> > use it. Google for "shot own gun"..
>
> As noted above, google give you a fact, but not all the facts, keep
trying.

Losing interest.. must.. not fall.. asleep..

Provide me with evidence that carrying around a gun
prevents assault. Use google, it'll give you more info
than what you've offered so far.

hippy

 

[hippy]

"L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com
> Yet in the county in the USA where it is compulsory to carry a gun, they
> don't have this problem. or a significant crime rate.

Which county is that? (sorry google was taking too long)

> we will increase our risk of assault, rape and murder, all because we
> pretend that restricting access to firearms helps (in spite of the latest
> stats that have shown no significant change in violent crime rates since
> before the gun buyback). ie we have traded our abilty to defend ourselves
> for no gain.

Where is the "increased the risk of assault, rape, murder" when you
say yourself there's been "no significant change in violent crime rates
since before the gun buyback". Make up your mind.

hippy

 

[qtq]

L'acrobat wrote:
> > What proportion of rapes do you think having women carry guns will
> > prevent? [hint: it's in the single digit percent range.]
> and you think that preventing a percentage of rapes isn't worth
doing? what
> does that say about you, just how ****ed up do you have to be to
think that
> your sad ideology is worth letting that happen to women, when it will

> prevent some rapes and deter others?

You obviously know very little about rape.

"letting that happen to women"? is that the same "letting that happen
to women" as allowing men to threaten their partners with guns[0], the
same "letting that happen to women" as increasing the murder rates for
women[1], the same "letting that happen to women" as a judge saying
that "no means yes", the same "letting that happen to women" that
allows men who say "but I thought she wanted to have sex" to be
acquitted[2]?

misogynist pig.

preventing a percentage of rapes isn't worth doing if it makes other
things worse.

[0] http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/Firearms9803.htm
[1] ibid.
[2] http://law.anu.edu.au/criminet/tartrape1.html

 

[qtq]

L'acrobat wrote:
> "qtq" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Because those of us who rountinely deal with firearms know how the
numbers
> translate to reality.
> The wannabes raise the numbers then try to hide from them when they
turn out
> to not mean what they wished they mean.

I'm not hiding from anything. You've failed to present your own
numbers.

 

[qtq]

L'acrobat wrote:
> "qtq" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Because those of us who rountinely deal with firearms know how the
numbers
> translate to reality.
> The wannabes raise the numbers then try to hide from them when they
turn out
> to not mean what they wished they mean.

I'm not hiding from anything. You've failed to present your own
numbers.

 

[Paul J]

Arrrgggg, there's no accounting for stupidity! As for attributing "blame", lets look more towards some the worst excesses of US-style culture that have been imported into Australia for years.

Non-cycling anecdote - Flashback to NYE 2003, caught a No. 19 Tram from Coburg into the city. On the tram was a pair of flash young lads, drinking UDL's (gin & juice?), playing gawd awful 50 cent on the Mp3 & dissin' all hoes on the tram.

Now here's the tragic bit, they were refering to themselves as Fawkner "****ers" or is that ****az...sorry, no insult intended to anyone. They looked like very nice young boys from a very nice middle-eastern family. Not forgetting, one of the pair had a crappy replicate pistol. He was aiming the thing & pretending to shoot passengers. The lads alighted the tram at Bourke St Mall. After stifling giggles, I couldn't help but stand up from my seat & watch them swagger up the mall.

Unfortunately the milling NYE crowds obscured my view - I still wonder if they ventured more than 20m without getting a face plant courtesy of the Vic Police, who insidently, do carry real shooters. Hmmm, amazed they didn't receive a 38 hollow point for being STUPID.

Wouldn't it be nice to see more instant retribution in cases like this. For instance, an "innocent" bystander giving these kiddies the flogging that their ***** daddies failed to dish out. That is what is truly needed. And on a similar rant... how about flogging these lazy pigs that drop their cigarette butts on the ground. Hope they all get lung cancer and die a slow painful death.

 

[hippy]

"Paul J" <[email protected]
> Wouldn't it be nice to see more instant retribution in cases like this.
> For instance, an "innocent" bystander giving these kiddies the flogging
> that their ***** daddies failed to dish out. That is what is truly
> needed. And on a similar rant... how about flogging these lazy pigs
> that drop their cigarette butts on the ground. Hope they all get lung
> cancer and die a slow painful death.

I'd actually prefer it to be a fast one.. less strain on
the health system and less passive smoke I have to
inhale..

hippy

 

[Tamyka Bell]

hippy wrote:
>
> "L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com
> > "hippy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > "L'acrobat" <husky.65@delete_me.bigpond.com> wrote
> > >> Or to put it another way, you are a sad bullshitter.
> > >
> > > Some interesting threads you got L'acrobat... maybe you should just
> ride?
> > > http://groups.google.com.au/groups?q=L'acrobat&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wg
> >
> > Its funny how its always the lefties who think they have a right to
> dictate
> > what a person can REPLY to...
>
> Dictate? What's a "leftie"? I'm right-handed...
>
> hippy

I was ambidextrous when I was little, but they told me to be a
"rightie"...

T

 

[hippy]

"Tamyka Bell" <[email protected]
> hippy wrote:
> > Dictate? What's a "leftie"? I'm right-handed...
>
> I was ambidextrous when I was little, but they told me to be a
> "rightie"...

Strangely, I am right handed in everything except batting sports
(cricket, baseball, golf, etc) and when I started archery as a kid
they found that I used both eyes equally, where most people
favoured one. So, I shot with my right, simply because there's
more used equipment available for the righties..

hippy

 

[[email protected]]

http://www.ardice.com/Science/Biolo...hordata/Mammalia/Elephants/African_Elephants/

 

[flyingdutch]

Strangely, I am right handed in everything except batting sports
(cricket, baseball, golf, etc) and when I started archery as a kid
they found that I used both eyes equally, where most people
favoured one. So, I shot with my right, simply because there's
more used equipment available for the righties..

hippy

how's your archery accuracy whilst riding?
now there's an anti-****-driver philosophy...

 

[hippy]

"flyingdutch" <[email protected]
> hippy Wrote:
> > Strangely, I am right handed in everything except batting sports
> > (cricket, baseball, golf, etc) and when I started archery as a kid
> > they found that I used both eyes equally, where most people
> > favoured one. So, I shot with my right, simply because there's
> > more used equipment available for the righties..
>
> how's your archery accuracy whilst riding?
> now there's an anti-****-driver philosophy...

The thought has crossed my mind, but, shooting recurve
means quite a large bow to hold onto - quite awkward to
ride with, I reckon, and riding no hands, loading a bow,
chasing a driver after being knocked down... not a high
chance of being successful. Probably a good thing too! ;-)

hippy

 

[phrankus]

Police wrap: Cyclist shot in airgun attack
November 17, 2004 - 8:20AM

Four men have been arrested after an alleged "drive-by" shooting of a cyclist with an air rifle in Melbourne.

Police allege a man leant out of the window of a moving vehicle on St Kilda Road in South Melbourne and shot at a cyclist with an air rifle about 4am (AEDT) yesterday.

The cyclist was not seriously hurt but suffered a graze to his shoulder.

Police said a description of the car, a maroon Ford Fairlane, was issued and the vehicle was quickly spotted by the operator of a surveillance camera driving along Russell Street.

The four men were arrested and interviewed and are to be charged on summons with conduct likely to cause serious injury.

Yesterday afternoon, a mate and i were riding out to the beaches north of mackay and got beeped and swore at. The exact same spot on the way back a 4wd rolls by and pegs two golf balls at us, ....followed him down to the servo and just gave him a friendly chat..

 

[TimC]

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 at 04:00 GMT, phrankus (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> Yesterday afternoon, a mate and i were riding out to the beaches north
> of mackay and got beeped and swore at. The exact same spot on the way
> back a 4wd rolls by and pegs two golf balls at us, dinting my mates
> bike and the other just missing my right thigh....followed him down to
> the servo and just gave him a friendly chat..

Well, don't leave us in antici.....pation like this. Details? What did
you cook them in? Any marinade? Did the dogs like them?

--
TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/
I repeat myself when under stress. I repeat myself when under
stress. I repeat myself when under stress. I repeat myself when
under stress. I repeat myself when under stress. I repeat myself
when under stress. I repeat myself when under stress. I repeat