On 07/29/2011 08:31 AM, John Harvey wrote: > I seem to recall something about how the communists seized peoples guns as a > part of their strategy, just prior to killing them by the millions, as did > Hitler. You can have mine, when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers! > > John Harvey
Correct. When a communist regime come to power within a country, about 30% of the countries population will be exterminated in a societal re-engineering, but I think this would hold true whenever any extremist group raises to power, whether they be on the right, like Religious Righter extremist or Islamic extremist, or are coming from the from left wing extremist groups. http://www.sovietstory.com/about-the-film/flash-trailer/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYWeynMDcBU&feature=player_detailpage Regards, LelandJ > -----Original Message----- > From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf > Of geoff > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 4:09 AM > To: 'ProFox Email List' > Subject: RE: [OT] Unarmed Police > > Your argument is exactly what I expected. The same argument was used when an > Australian crazy killed 35 people some 15 years ago. If the populace had had > guns the death toll would have been 1/10 what it was. The flipside is that > the same day as the Norwegian crazy did his think an american family got > into an argument at an ice rink. Result: 7 dead from gunshots. In Australia > (or England) the result would have been black eyes and wounded pride. And > that situation is played out thousands of times every year. USA gun death > toll: 50,000. Australia (1/16th the population): 90. > > The argument is not only simply but overwhelming. And I am just as sure you > do not accept it - just like the rest of your country. So while you bemoan > (rightly) the deaths of 4000 soldiers over the last 8 years, you say nothing > of the 400,000 dead at home from guns. > > -----Original Message----- > From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf > Of Michael Madigan > Sent: Friday, 29 July 2011 6:18 PM > To: ProFox Email List > Subject: Re: [OT] Unarmed Police > > So a man man comes onto an island and has a shooting spree for 90 minutes > and nobody has a gun to shoot him. I guess those 90 people were safer > without owning a gun. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Hill<paulroberth...@gmail.com> > To: ProFox Email List<profox@leafe.com> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 4:25 AM > Subject: Re: [OT] Unarmed Police > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Michael Madigan<mmadi10...@yahoo.com> > wrote: >> Why would you want unarmed police when the terrorists are armed to the > teeth? > > Because a gun is no use against a bomb. > Because sometimes police shoot innocent people. > Because armed police promote encourage armed criminals. > > But, then again I live in a country where the populous don't have a > fanatical obsession with firearms. > > Total firearm-related death rate per 100,000 per year: > United States 15.22 > England/Wales 0.46 > > (from wikipedia, so usual caveats apply) > > -- > Paul > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/4e32bde9.7020...@mail.smvfp.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
