Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sergarr]

In another case he is a suspect. He is suspected of having more weed in stock in his coffeeshops than allowed. This is a red herring, and the government knows that. Every last coffeeshop always has too much in stock, because it is not logistically possible to keep to the limit of 200 grammes. You average Joe coffeeshop over here sells that in a few hours, a popular coffeeshop sells that in 30 minutes. He is also suspected of moneylaundry, related to the overstocking.

Protip: just because the crime is not prosecuted, doesn't mean it's legal. He's violated the law on legally selling drugs, and thus he's an illegal drug dealer who totally and completely deserves to rot in prison for destroying the fabric of society.

This is sarcasm right?

What's so suspect about my reasoning? Did he violate the law? Yes. Did he sell drugs? Yes. He's an illegal drug dealer. One of the worst kinds of people to ever exist on Earth. They profit on people's misery. Dutch authorities did a good job by informing the local Thai police of his malicious activities.

[ChairmanPoo]

Indeed.

In all honesty I'm reluctant to travel, let alone move, anywhere outside W. Europe. You never know what will happen.

The US

Eehh, not that much anymore, if the news are anything to go by.

 Canada, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand are all fine too, you know.

Granted, all those are nice to visit.

Far away, though

[Baffler]

-wrong thread-

[Erkki]

Indeed.

In all honesty I'm reluctant to travel, let alone move, anywhere outside W. Europe. You never know what will happen.

People still dont always lock their doors in many parts of the country here. I have all kinds of stuff on the porch visible to people walking by and in 21 years bicycles, car wheels, garden tools or furniture etc. are still to be stolen. I'm in a suburb, almost countryside and a good distance from what could be called a proper town, but still.

[Silverthrone]

You are probably right, on the whole, and particularly regarding my scissor-scheme.

I imagine you would make a rather terrifying candidate for Home Secretary xD

Well, quite. They could frighten children with me. It would be a very heavy-handed (and no doubt very brief) rule. Bewildering, terrifying and terribly amusing.

As a special treat:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

He is cruel, but he is... No, he is not particularly fair either, really.

[ChairmanPoo]

Tbh the initial statement was concerning legal status/travel-residence annoyances, rather than outright crime stats. It was in regards to the prior post about the retired Dutch pot seller in Thailand. There's too much uncertainity involved.

I'm not too sure the legal status of foreign nationals in Australia is very good either, but I'm guessing that at worst you'd get deported elsewhere (which can be troublesome enough if you're intending to stay)


------

Pd: the London terrorist's original name was apparently Adrian Russell Ajao and wasnt particularily Middle Eastern.  He became a muslim and changed his name some years ago. Or so I just read.

Coincidentally I was remembering the case of John Walker Lindh this morning

[Strife26]

You know what's pissing me off about the attack?

It's not the attack itself, but how gun enthusiasts, seemingly without caring for the dead and injured, are using it to say how great it would be if everyone in Britain had a gun. Not only is there a lack of respect there, there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how if gun access was easy, it's far easier for people like the bastard to perform a mass shooting.

People use thing to make trite gun arguments. People respond to trite gun arguments with trite other gun arguments.

In other news, water wet.

[Erkki]

You know what's pissing me off about the attack?

It's not the attack itself, but how gun enthusiasts, seemingly without caring for the dead and injured, are using it to say how great it would be if everyone in Britain had a gun. Not only is there a lack of respect there, there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how if gun access was easy, it's far easier for people like the bastard to perform a mass shooting.

The "everyone would be safe if.." hyperbole goes both ways. The gun discussion always happens immediately after something nasty happens. The gun discussion should not be had when everyones heated but thats when always does.

In late November / December 2015 the EU Commission had had its new proposal for firearms directive on the shelf for almost a full year. The very next Monday from the Paris attacks Juncker & CO including our own pretty boy Jyrki Katainen went for it and started the process to validate the directive.

Well, you can read their rationale and the directive proposal yourself, I think LW especially could be interested in it: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6218_en.htm

What they REALLY wanted to do was to disarm the whole Europe the way it has been done in UK except even more, for the sake of security, when the time would be right. And security sells at times of hystery.

Because apparently Finnish hunters and reservists are guilty of Jihadi terrorism in Paris. Me, too.

[Strife26]

You know what's pissing me off about the attack?

It's not the attack itself, but how gun enthusiasts, seemingly without caring for the dead and injured, are using it to say how great it would be if everyone in Britain had a gun. Not only is there a lack of respect there, there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how if gun access was easy, it's far easier for people like the bastard to perform a mass shooting.

People use thing to make trite gun arguments. People respond to trite gun arguments with trite other gun arguments.

In other news, water wet.

Doesn't mean I can't get annoyed at the sheer callousness of it.

Fair enough

[Antioch]

You know what's pissing me off about the attack?

It's not the attack itself, but how gun enthusiasts, seemingly without caring for the dead and injured, are using it to say how great it would be if everyone in Britain had a gun. Not only is there a lack of respect there, there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how if gun access was easy, it's far easier for people like the bastard to perform a mass shooting.

In this case the gun laws prevented the attacker from having a gun.

And I think the fact that he did not have a gun may have saved a lot of lives.

So I have no idea how the gun lobby is spinning this to make it look like this guy being able to buy a gun would have been a good thing.

[hector13]

You know what's pissing me off about the attack?

It's not the attack itself, but how gun enthusiasts, seemingly without caring for the dead and injured, are using it to say how great it would be if everyone in Britain had a gun. Not only is there a lack of respect there, there's a fundamental misunderstanding of how if gun access was easy, it's far easier for people like the bastard to perform a mass shooting.

In this case the gun laws prevented the attacker from having a gun.

And I think the fact that he did not have a gun may have saved a lot of lives.

So I have no idea how the gun lobby is spinning this to make it look like this guy being able to buy a gun would have been a good thing.

"Someone would (emphasis on would, I've not seen anyone say that it might not have happened, but that it WOULD have happened) have shot him before he could do any damage"

Going so far as someone saying that one shot would have ended it all, because no matter where you're shot, no matter how hopped up on adrenaline you are, you will automatically slump over.

And the person doing the shooting is always going to hit what they're aiming at too, of course.

[Jopax]

I'm curious about one thing tho, what's the number of mass shootings that were ended early by a civilian having a gun? Like, for all the claims "if only they were all armed" every time a shooting or something similar happens, when has it actually happened? Because I can't recall a single time, like ever, that an armed civilian stopped a mass shooting or an attack of some sort.

[Erkki]

I'm curious about one thing tho, what's the number of mass shootings that were ended early by a civilian having a gun? Like, for all the claims "if only they were all armed" every time a shooting or something similar happens, when has it actually happened? Because I can't recall a single time, like ever, that an armed civilian stopped a mass shooting or an attack of some sort.

It doesnt happen often, but has happened in US schools and universities several times that either a teacher or another student has stopped a mass shooter. Sometimes they've had to run to their cars for their guns, but still.

The point in allowing carrying is in prevention of crime from being attempted. Mass shooters all too often choose gun free zones and other soft targets, using guns, vehicle or bomb(s). Although my personal opinion is that when it comes to islamic terror, a Jihadist who wants to become martyr is probably only slightly less effective with guns around(they effect his plans little), since part of the goal is dying. Just maximizing victim numbers is at best a bit harder.

Within Europe, concealed carry is allowed at least in Czech Republic and Estonia. Interestingly I believe it was a INTERPOL chief who recommended allowing concealed carry as an (cost?) effective way to at least somewhat inhibit terror attacks.

[ChairmanPoo]

Poorly planned though. I think they're just random berserkers. If a terrorist group makes a public call for help from western denizens, a couple of crazies will likely answer. Not likely to be the best at planning an attack, but certainly cheap, and if properly spinned, can look "good" for the media

[martinuzz]

You still refer to Chinese as chins and japanese as bloody japs then? That's soo last century.