British Gun and Drug laws strike again!


PDA






MicroBalrog
July 20, 2003, 06:56 AM
Grudge call led to drug and gun raids
By Steve Castle
Jul 18, 2003, 16:01:00

Armed police in riot gear surrounded the Walsall homes of a disabled ex-gravedigger and his elderly mother after receiving a tip-off there was a cache of weapons and drugs inside, a court was told.

A search of the neighbouring properties in North Street uncovered a starting pistol and a tin containing a "microscopic" amount of cannabis, which William Lowe had picked up in the street because he needed the tin, the town's magistrates heard.

Someone with a grudge against Lowe had had made the call to police which resulted in his mother becoming traumatised and terrified by what was happening, the court was told.

Lowe, aged 43, of North Street, pleaded guilty yesterday to possession of the handgun and the cannabis. He was given a four-month prison sentence suspended for a year and ordered to pay £55 costs.

Wendy Brookes, prosecuting, said when police raided Lowe's home they found the tin of cannabis and the starting pistol, which had been adapted so it could fire live rounds.

However, David Grice, defending, said Lowe had never used cannabis in his life and had picked up the tin not knowing what was inside, so he could use it to store his roll-up tobacco.

He had bought the starting pistol, which was already adapted, from a stall at Walsall market five years earlier and had forgotten it was even in his possession.

He told the court: "Someone with a grievance against him phoned the police and told them there were drugs, guns and even hand grenades on the premises.

"Armed police surrounded the house and also that of Mrs Lowe, who lives next door, and this caused her great trauma."




Welcome to the Soviet Socialist Republic of England and Wales.

If you enjoyed reading about "British Gun and Drug laws strike again!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
c_yeager
July 20, 2003, 07:13 AM
And to think, thats the island that gave birth to the great men that founded THIS nation. sad indeed.

riverdog
July 20, 2003, 11:46 AM
Most of the good geneic material left the island for North America and Australia before the 20th Century.

Preacherman
July 20, 2003, 11:58 AM
Riverdog, a lot of the best of the remaining genetic material served - and died - as leaders in the First and Second World Wars. Two whole generations of the best and bravest were virtually wiped out. The results are as we now see them... :(

agricola
July 20, 2003, 03:29 PM
if the "Great Genetic Material" went anywhere, it went to Australia, and not to a place where a great deal of the population is eating itself to death.

c_yeager
July 20, 2003, 04:27 PM
Looks like agricola is starting to lash out. If the average body fat percentage of a nation has anything to do with its "quality" then shoulndt Ethiopia be the best place in the world?

agricola
July 20, 2003, 04:46 PM
sorry, i mustnt have read those three preceding posts as the acme of wisdom that they clearly were and mistook them for the comments of fools :rolleyes:

c_yeager
July 20, 2003, 04:55 PM
SO, you really have nothing to say about the article then do you?

WonderNine
July 20, 2003, 05:15 PM
agricola, you clearly have no interest in firearms as all you do is post in Legal and Political. What's the point of your posting on this board?

HankB
July 20, 2003, 05:20 PM
if the "Great Genetic Material" went anywhere, it went to Australia, and not to a place where a great deal of the population is eating itself to death. So at last you admit that residents of a penal colony are better genetically than those left behind on your small island! Your honesty is to be commended.

As for eating ourselves to death, I note that Fergie came here to lose weight. (Making Weight Watchers commercials is probably the closest a Royal - even one by marriage - ever came to honest work.)

Though I suppose English cooking, bad teeth, and Mad Cows can work to suppress one's appetite . . .

agricola
July 20, 2003, 05:43 PM
wondernine,

I post here because, frankly, most if not all of the information people base their opinions of the UK on comes from the sewer, and cannot be left unchallenged.

A large majority of the articles on this board which deal with the UK and the legal system here are so distorted by error, mistruth and outright lies as to demand challenge; when similar articles are posted by antis you find many of you weighing in to point out the obvious mistakes, all I am doing is the same. An example is shown by the Sun article posted, the Pate article from microbalrog, the various Joyce Lee Malcolm / Lott studies that quote / cite Greenwood and yet manage to ignore his central point as well as the more amateur stuff that appears here from time to time.

This thread is evidence of something else though, the sometimes all-to-evident bias against the UK from people who are, frankly, capable of better conversation than this pseudoscientific nonsense. I mean, what group of idiots can honestly think of themselves as genetically superior to other members of the human race? Preacherman especially, you should know better.

c_yeager,

a man had cannabis and a handgun in his home. Police were tipped off, got a warrant and raided the home and recovered cannabis and gun. man pleads guilty. what more is there to say? bleating from people who have never and probably will never come here?

actually, i do have a point. its amazing how much of the defence's mitigation can make it into "fact" for a newspaper article.

MicroBalrog
July 20, 2003, 05:51 PM
The police [and through them, society], used violence to stop someone from posessing a weapon less potent than a crossbow and a drug less addictive than tobacco. What more there's to say?


The UK is the best example to date that drug and gun laws are useless.

agricola
July 20, 2003, 05:58 PM
micro,

id agree that drug laws are probably self-defeating and cause far more problems that they solve; gun laws are another question. oh, and the gun in question was a converted starting pistol capable of firing real rounds (making it more dangerous than a crossbow), please read your cut and pastes.

MicroBalrog
July 20, 2003, 06:04 PM
I once read that, however, AFAIK most "converted starting pistols" are converted to fire .22 or .32 cartridges. I'd rather be shot with a crossbow any day.

M67
July 20, 2003, 06:26 PM
WonderNine, just think of agricola as a mascot. Anyway, what's the fun in having a discussion if everybody agrees on everything? And he is right about a lot of the information posted here about the UK and other places. It is often less than informative.

I disagree with agricola's views on gun control, but that doesn't make him an idjit. Neither does the fact that he is British or European. And the way some of you guys talk about Europeans in general and Brits in particular can sometimes be a bit tiring. You're not covering up for an inferiority complex, are you? :D

On topic: I think a "commando raid" in a situation like this is way out of line. BUT: The guy was convicted of possession of an illegal drug and an illegal firearm. He was given a suspended sentence. How many million Americans are serving long prison terms for possession of cannabis? And you can argue all you want that converting a starter gun to fire live ammo shouldn't be illegal, but until the law is changed, it is. If you were caught with, say an unregistered homemade suppressor (which isn't even a firearm) in the US, would you get away with a suspended sentence? BTW, FWIW I think it's easier to own a suppressed gun (rifle) in Britain than it is in the US...

MicroBalrog
July 20, 2003, 06:43 PM
Wondernine:

Here's one reason I disagree with these laws:

I believe that violence, except in self-defense, begets violence.

And oppression begets oppression.

Once you decide that the government should go out and put people in prison for possessing cannabis, you authorised the government to use violence against cannabis possessors, real or suspected. And then suddenly people start being getting beaten up and shot by the cops during no-knock raids, because the violence escalates.

Once you decide that the government should go out and put people in prison for illegal possession of suppressor parts or "conversion kits", you authorised the government to use violence against illegal weapon possessors, real or suspected. And then kittens get stomped, people get beaten up, and eventually, somebody shoots Sammy Weaver.

The logical historical conclusion of victimless-crime laws is not elimination of cannabis/guns/whatever. It's violence in all forms against those who violate them - or are suspected of doing so.

The logical conclusion of drug laws is military operations in Chechnya and Central America. It's thousand of people killed each year. It's Rainbow farm.

The logical conclusion of gun laws is a raid like in this story. It's Waco. Ruby Ridge. The Altalena.

Sorry for being incoherent here...

rrader
July 20, 2003, 09:18 PM
if the "Great Genetic Material" went anywhere, it went to Australia, and not to a place where a great deal of the population is eating itself to death.

Again Agricola demonstrates his ignorance and bias. The rates of heart disease and obesity are higher in Scotland, and England than they are in the USA.

Amazing when one considers that a significant portion of the population there are sheeple.

bah baah, Martin shot him in the baacck, baaah baaah

Standing Wolf
July 20, 2003, 10:22 PM
Rarely does a day pass when I fail to feel grateful to our forefathers for having rebelled against the English and founded a republic.

I think England would have been much happier as a Nazi subject state: no decisions to make, no honor to uphold, no traditions to bear in mind: simple work, work, work.

rrader
July 20, 2003, 11:33 PM
I think England would have been much happier as a Nazi subject state

A significant portion of the House of Windsor (i.e, Edward VIII et al.) certainly thought so.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 02:08 AM
rrader,

pot? black? kettle?

Ian
July 21, 2003, 02:40 AM
Uh-oh, pot and a 'converted' starter pistol!:rolleyes:

I bet there a farmers in the UK who have diesel fuel and fertilizer, and maybe even alcohol too! Better go round 'em up!

agricola
July 21, 2003, 03:20 AM
rrader,

wrong again!

Again Agricola demonstrates his ignorance and bias. The rates of heart disease and obesity are higher in Scotland, and England than they are in the USA.

http://www.iuns.org/features/obesity/obesity.htm

specifically:

http://www.iuns.org/features/obesity/tabfig.htm#Figure%201:

Mk VII
July 21, 2003, 03:36 AM
maybe the next time that G.W.B. asks that 'Nazi state' for some help with his latest foreign adventure we should Just Say No. We're obviously not worthy to appear on the same battlefield as freedom-loving Americans.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 03:42 AM
maybe the next time that G.W.B. asks that 'Nazi state' for some help with his latest foreign adventure we should Just Say No. We're obviously not worthy to appear on the same battlefield as freedom-loving Americans.

shouldnt that be just say nein?

seeker_two
July 21, 2003, 06:06 AM
agricola: Again I have to ask....

With the tone of your previous posts & the passion with which you write, what DO you do for a living?

Professional criminal?...

Lawyer?...

Or do you have another "personal bias" dog in this hunt?...

Kharn
July 21, 2003, 07:56 AM
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/07-minister.jpg
There is nothing to worry about, no guns or cannabis remain in the hands of the elderly in England. The Queen has been saved from another looney out to end her reign with a starting pistol while smoking a microscopic amount of reefer. Everyone is safe, return to your homes, baaaaaaah baaaaaaah...

Kharn :evil:

rrader
July 21, 2003, 09:42 AM
(noted herbivore) Agricola:

pot? black? kettle?

You're making even less sense than usual, quite a feat.

I spent the weekend at the range in Pungo, VA trying out a Ruger P94 I recently acquired.

What type of handgun do you own?

Oh, sorry, I forgot, under it's low and retrograde legal system your government doesn't allow you to own firearms of that sort.

And you bleat your approval of being herded in this way.

bah baah, Martin shot him in baaaack, baah, baaaah

Nazi? A little more reading in a contempory history text would stand you in good stead. Hitler, as with most of the great mass killers in the last century, were products of your political phiolosophy, i.e, the extreme Euro-hard-left, not mine. Mindless, ignorant, grunting anti-semitism typifies your Euro-leftist political philosophy, not my mainstream American conservatism. Thank God that type of low, shallow, venal culture typifies the UK and Europe, and not the good ole USA.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 11:17 AM
rrader,

i accept your (somewhat convoluted) apology for making a statement that was wholly incorrect. however i'd like to point out that you are on dodgy ground claiming that hitler was of the left wing - its only a hunch, but i've heard the weight of history would be against you on that one.

kharn,

at least credit the people you steal that joke off.

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 11:22 AM
Agricola,

why do you refuse to reply to my more serious accusations? Or do you concede I'm right?:evil:

agricola
July 21, 2003, 11:25 AM
what "serious accusations"? if youre talking about the drug laws, i agree with you in that IMHO they are more trouble than they are worth, i'd see them legalized tommorrow.

however guns are another matter in the UK context.

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 11:29 AM
Reposted in case you didn't notice:


Here's one reason I disagree with these laws:

I believe that violence, except in self-defense, begets violence.

And oppression begets oppression.

Once you decide that the government should go out and put people in prison for possessing cannabis, you authorised the government to use violence against cannabis possessors, real or suspected. And then suddenly people start being getting beaten up and shot by the cops during no-knock raids, because the violence escalates.

Once you decide that the government should go out and put people in prison for illegal possession of suppressor parts or "conversion kits", you authorised the government to use violence against illegal weapon possessors, real or suspected. And then kittens get stomped, people get beaten up, and eventually, somebody shoots Sammy Weaver.

The logical historical conclusion of victimless-crime laws is not elimination of cannabis/guns/whatever. It's violence in all forms against those who violate them - or are suspected of doing so.

The logical conclusion of drug laws is military operations in Chechnya and Central America. It's thousand of people killed each year. It's Rainbow farm.

The logical conclusion of gun laws is a raid like in this story. It's Waco. Ruby Ridge. The Altalena.

rrader
July 21, 2003, 11:46 AM
Agricola:

its only a hunch, but i've heard the weight of history would be against you on that one.

You seem to know as much about European history as you do about the common law, the Martin case, or any other topic you've pontificated about here on THR, that's to say not much.

Hitler was a product of the political left, and an early member of the German Communist Party. Photographs of him attending party meetings exist. Check Arthur Tolland's book for more. And of course the term Nazi is a German acronym for Hitler's National SOCIALIST Party. Most of the great mass murderers of the 20th century were of the left, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Heng Sen, Milosevic, Arafat, etc..., all European educated leftists. Given your history of extreme hard-left governments it's not suprising then that you Europeans are yet only 5 years past your LATEST round of intercine genocide, your LATEST round of death camps.

Apology? No, again a little work on your reading comprehension skills are in order. I only sarcasticly meant that I feel somewhat sorry for you, having to live in a crime-ridden, tightly repressive, socialist society like the UK.

Take heart, soon you'll have the jug-eared human tampon as your "King" (hard to believe anyone over the age of ten would stand for such a thing) and all will be well in Merry ole England.

bah baaah Martin shot him in the baaaaack, baah baaah

seeker_two
July 21, 2003, 11:56 AM
agricola: Have you seen this movie?...

http://64.95.118.51/images/opti/e3/00/1068177-movie-resized200.jpg

Richard III synopsis (http://us.imdb.com/Plot?0114279)

Does it seem familar to you?

Be careful what you wish for...:what:

agricola
July 21, 2003, 12:11 PM
rrader,

that apology would be for the obesity thread, which you clearly got wrong.

hitler was a nationalist, and attracted to his movement other "romantic" nationalists of that type which are peculiar to Germany, like Himmler. He was not a socialist in any sense that a socialist would understand - he supported enthusiastically "Big Business" as it was then understood - Krupp, Thyssen, IG Farben, and so on. His first acts in terms of political action when in power was to attack the Left (in terms of trade unionists, Communists and so on). His next major act was to attack those who could be confused as "socialist" in his movement (Rohm and those within the SA like Gregor Strasser who thought a second proletarian revolution should follow the "seizure of power")

Your laughable beliefs also ignore the 1923 Putsch, which was supported by Ludendorff and many of the old Freikorp Movement, the history of the SS as a Party organ. Read Padfield's biography of Himmler, or Kershaw, or even someone like Guderian or Manstein, people who were actually there. You are talking nonsense.

Ask yourself, if you can be bothered to actually LEARN something of this period, who supported Hitler during the 1930s?

small business, military officers, big business, farmers, ex-military men and parts of the old aristocracy (who thought they could control him)

and who opposed him?

workers, students, trade unionists

are we there yet?

besides, pictures of Hitler at a Communist Party meeting mean precisely zero, especially around the immediate postwar period when he was used by Rohm as one of his agents (its how he became involved with the Nazis in the first place). There is plenty of evidence that later Hitlerites supported the crushing of the Spartacist movement, as well as other leftwing movements in the immediate postwar.

Your statements about the "German Communist Party" are nonsensical, and further evidence of your willingness to utterly fabricate statements to make your "points" in this debate. For Hitler to be an "early member" of the German Communist Party, he would have to have been at least an adolescent in 1848 when Marx and Engels issued their demands:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/03/24.htm

As mentioned above, there was a (and this is a very loose interpretation) "socialist" wing of the NSDAP lead by the Strasser brothers and Rohm, and which found most popularity within the SA. This group was purged by Hitler during the Night of the Long Knifes. The Leftist tendency within the NSDAP, if it ever existed in terms that a contempoary leftist would understand, died that night.

If you are going to debate here, please try and stick to the truth because youre just making yourself look stupid. I never thought I'd say this, but I wish for the days of Russ Howard, Cordex and Dischord on TFL where debaters actually made statements that could be supported.

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 12:15 PM
SOCIALISM
9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

SOCIAL ENGINEERING/PUBLIC HEALTH
20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement



The 25-point program. All of these promises were fulfilled.
After 1933, many unionists and communists came to support the Nazis.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 12:16 PM
seeker_two,

well done, you have taken the biscuit on this debate. It seems familiar because Richard III was actually King of England at one stage....... :rolleyes:

agricola
July 21, 2003, 01:58 PM
microbalrog,

After 1933, many unionists and communists came to support the Nazis.

like who? the KPD, SPD and others remained in opposition to Nazism, either within the concentration camp or without. The Nazis were rabid anti-Leftists. Oh, and not all of those promises were fulfilled - war profiteers like Krupp remained as rich, if not richer, under the Nazis than they had been previously.

the Nazis were statists, and evil, but that does not make them socialists.

for the uneducated:

http://www.bartleby.com/65/na/NatlSoci.html

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 02:06 PM
Agricola: While many party fonctionnaires said loyal, most rank and file supporters did not.

rrader
July 21, 2003, 03:11 PM
noted ruminant Agricola:

that apology would be for the obesity thread, which you clearly got wrong.


Apology for an obesity thread? *** kind of solvents are you huffing LOL. Scotland has one of the highest rates of heart disease in the western world, and both Scotland and England have higher rates of heart disease and obesity than do similar "racial" and ethnic groups in the US.

As for your explaination of Hitler's NOT being a socialist, it's laughable. You're merely trying to redefine socialism to fit your bias. You've strung together a series of non-related facts to try and whitewash the fact that he was indeed a follower of your socialist political philosophy. Gibberish. And so the presence of SOCIALIST in the Nazi acronym means nothing? Just as inaccurate as your posts on the Martin case. Germany had all of the features associated with socialist systems: State / centrally planned economy and / nationalization of major industries, State direction or outright seizure of the banking system, extreme political indoctrination in the schools, severe repression of churches and opposition political groups, extermes of state-sponsered violence against the people, nationalization of the health care system, no free elections, extreme restrictions on private firearms ownership etc... These were/are the hallmarks of socialist systems from East to West, Bulgaria, East Germany, Vietnam, etc... You are woefully ignorant of the fact that socialist systems encompass much more than just economic interests. Krupp and Diamler existed as private concerns in the Nazi era? only on paper.

Pictures of Hitler at German Communist Party meets mean nothing? Again, *** kind of solvents are you huffing? Hitler was a product of the extreme political left in Europe. He finally quit the Communist Party because the open presence of Jews offended him greatly. Not because of any ideological differences.

Socialist systems are best characterized by countries like Germany under the Nazis, or East germany under the communists, not by Norway or Finland or the UK today.


baah, baaah, Martin shot him in the baaack, baah, baaah, guns are baad, baaaad, bah, baaah

agricola
July 21, 2003, 03:51 PM
sigh,

did you read that article? the US has a higher rate of obesity than the UK - and i believe the medical experts, rather than someone who has consistently lied here to make their "points", and whose main ability seems to be stretching the already tired "sheeple" joke to new extremes. The sad part is the graphs clearly showed the ethnic breakdown in the US, and yet you still think you can get away making those utterly fraudlent claims. You were wrong; at least have the honesty to admit it (you were wrong over the "early member of the German Communist Party" as well btw)

does the word "democratic" in the title of North Korea mean its a democracy? how about the old East Germany? Only a total and complete fool would try and claim the Nazis were socialists; they were statists (which is what you probably confuse with socialism), but statists on the right of politics - you remember all that anti-semitic, nationalist, "third reich" stuff?

I have in front of me Kershaw's immense biography of Hitler. In all its 1600-odd pages over two volumes, he neglects to mention Adolf Hitler being a member of the KPD, as does the rest of the academic community.

Please, for yourself, prove (if you can) your claims. I for one state here and now that you are talking utter nonsense, and that this is just another dishonesty, but this is your chance to prove me wrong.

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 03:55 PM
Agricola, I suggest you read Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich".

IIRC it mentions union members and KPD members moving to the Nazi Party.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 04:10 PM
microbalrog,

not really - there may have been some movement by voters, but thats hardly the same as party members, and its to be expected when both the SPD and KPD were outlawed prior to the March 1933 elections; plus of course the worker's own organizations would be destroyed and replaced by the Strength Through Joy movement. Given all that, it would be difficult to stand against the tide by yourself. Himmlers SD probably had lists of all card carrying members in any case (given the arrests later), so its unlikely that they could have submerged themselves in the NSDAP to any large scale extent.

Saying that, those parties polled 7.2 million and 4.8 million votes respectively in March 1933 despite being outlawed so one would imagine most people would have continued voting that way had the option been left open to them.

MicroBalrog
July 21, 2003, 04:12 PM
Perhaps you're correct, but the Strenght through Joy movement gave the unionists all that the unions fought for and more.

rrader
July 21, 2003, 04:23 PM
noted ruminant Agricola:

I have in front of me Kershaw's immense biography of Hitler

I'm not impressed. You have demonstrated a singular ability to miss every important fact that comes your way, I'm sure you'll get nothing out of any biography of Hitler.

Again, the German National Socialist Party met every criteria to be described as socialist, and clearly thought of themselves as such. Your arguments are typical of a European left that tries to run away from its dark past: Hitler, Stalin, Tito, Milosevc, etc..., all products of a left that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions in the past century. Sad to see how well it works, sad to see you Europeans return to the political hard-left time and again, its almost biblical really: Like a dog to its vomit... sad to see the results repeated over and over again, the death camps again, the mass killing again, sad. So long as Europeans like you live in denial it will keep happening. Very sad.

Check your figures again, The WHO and JAMA both report higher levels of obesity and heart disease in the UK than the USA in absolute terms and when corrected for demographic differences.


bah baah Martin shot him in the baaack, guns are baaad, bah, baaah Americans are faaaat, baah baaaah

agricola
July 21, 2003, 04:25 PM
rrader,

no evidence eh? sad. still, when you cant read those graphs on obesity (which was part of your original claims) and retract that part of your statement, i guess we shall have to leave your ignorance on display.

nice learning of the word "ruminant" by the way. have a gold star clever boy!

agricola
July 21, 2003, 04:28 PM
rrader,

oh, and if youre getting on your high horse, you can at least get the name right. Its National Socialist German Workers Party, or NSDAP.

agricola
July 21, 2003, 04:48 PM
rrader,

oh, and the WHO statistics are on that link i posted on page one. Three lies on this thread.... does this mean youre back to the dugout now?

Ian
July 21, 2003, 04:51 PM
Guys, mass murder by government is NOT limited to leftist regimes. Hitler was a rightist, and so was Chiang Kai-Shek, and those two are both in the top 4 of bloodiest regimes of the 20th century.

The apparent similarities between Hitler's party line and socialism are due to the fact that extreme leftism and extreme rightism are simply two sides of the exact same coin: statism. The differences between left-wing communistic dictators and right-wing nationalistic dictators is darn thin (and wholly invisible when you're on the receiving end of the iron boot).

seeker_two
July 21, 2003, 05:10 PM
well done, you have taken the biscuit on this debate. It seems familiar because Richard III was actually King of England at one stage.......

And the fact that, in this version, Richard is a fascist dictator in England who grinds freedom under his bootheel....

And that some of the "policies" remarked on in the film are similar to things happening in GB now....

Art imitating life?...:scrutiny:

(And yes, I DO know the history of Richard III. We actually GET Shakespeare on this side of the pond. And he'd absolutely cringe at what his country has become now...:fire: )

LawDog
July 21, 2003, 08:42 PM
That is quite enough. :fire:

Does the term "High Road" not mean a tinkers' damn to any of you?

Shame on the the lot.

Closed, for ganging up on a Member like a pack of carrion-feeding jackals.

Closed, for rolling about in the damned gutter.

Closed, for multiple violations of the BLOODY FORUM RULES.

I don't know which is worse: that you apparently haven't read those rules, or that you hold this Forum and Oleg Volk in such contempt that you simply don't bloody well bother to follow them.

LIGHTS OUT. :fire:

LawDog

If you enjoyed reading about "British Gun and Drug laws strike again!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!