Jail plan for owning crossbows, flamethrowers

Originally posted by Grayelf2009
The way things are going over here in the US , it won't be long before they try that here.

Never happen the SCA won't let it

Go on Just try and take our weapons... make my day

Wow, just wow. Some people will read anything out of context, and even change what I'd written in their quotes to make a redundant point. Let's begin.

Originally posted by Lazyninja
False. Bows and crossbows are hunting weapons. They haven't been weapons for war for a couple of centuries.

No, the crossbow was not designed as a hunting weapon, it was designed for warfare.

If you read this article, you'll notice the crossbow was a scaled-down version of a ballista. It was not designed for hunting, no matter what the modern usage is.

I did not say one could not use it for hunting, I just pointed out that it was originally designed to kill people. Try not to mix up what I've said, but you aren't the only one, so lets continue.

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Surely you jest here The Last Man on Earth??!!

I have no intention of insulting you, in the way you are trying to insult me. Since you literally know nothing about me other than I don't watch TV and I went to university, I'd stop trying to act the big man and just try reading what I write.

Originally posted by orangetom1999
You have some serious problems here in your thinking and education levels.

No, you need to try dropping your unwarranted superiority complex.

Originally posted by orangetom1999The above quote defines government ...not most peoples.

It does? Because I was replying to fixer1967 when he/she said:

Originally posted by fixer1967
SO is a rock and stick. They were the very first weapons man used. So are you for them banning rocks and sticks as well. ANYTHING and I do mean ANYTHING can be used as a weapon in some form or manner.

I don't think they were referring to governments using rocks and sticks to kill people. I think you'll find they were referring to lone nuts who go around shooting up schools and the like.

Originally posted by orangetom1999Governments are the major institution in most nations doing the killing. What on earth are you possibly thinking??

I was in no way contesting this as governments were not the subject of the conversation. You have taken the wrong end of the stick and run quite far in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by orangetom1999Also here in the states among those of us who can think...we know that a public education is a television education majoring in fears and insecurities... not in history.

Another petty attempt at belittling me, because you can't talk to other people like an adult, clearly. I am not a television watcher, as I have stated in this very thread.

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Of course. I imagine in the Middle Ages more people were killed by horses than crossbows.

Check your grasp of history again..closely. Most people in the middle ages could not afford horses. Most horses were owned by Royalty and the Feudal classes...ie the warring classes.....ie..government. IF the ordinary citizen had an animal it was some kind of cow or oxen...for doing work...if they could even afford that. Most ordinary peoples going to war...went to war afoot.
Most people died of old age..very young ...in or about their thirties or forties...and of diseases and childbirth...even injuries in labors et al.

Once again you leap and vault to a point I was not making nor contesting. I did not suggest that every other death was crossbow-related nor horse-related, I was merely saying that I find it probable that there were more horse-related deaths than crossbow-related deaths.

This does not mean that I think ever peasant had a full stable's worth of horses, nor do I think everyone had a crossbow. You have just made a wrong assumption and ran with it, again.

Originally posted by orangetom1999

I suspect I have a slightly better grasp of history than you do, judging from this segment of your post. Spears, bows, axes and knives are all prehistoric, and swords have been around since the Bronze Age.

Better think this through again in lieu of the concept that most of these tools were used for hunting and not war. Also the average human did not use them daily. The struggle for daily life was such that they were used in building homes, gathering firewood..et al...not for war or killing. It was governments which engaged in war and killing... even so today's. And they want to disarm us..the people. Very insecure of them.

And again, you make an incorrect assumption. I did not specify what I thought these weapons were used for, who had them or how many people died because of them, I simply said they had been around for more than "a few hundred years".

Stop reading implications that simply aren't there.

Originally posted by orangetom1999

You do understand that the obvious logical and reasonable solution to this dilemma is to get rid of people...yes??

I don't believe the eradication of people is logical or reasonable.

Think through your university education once again. Obviously someone thinks it a good idea and that it is logical and reasonable.
Try the French Revolution...where about 1 in 5 Frenchmen was killed at the behest of government. The French Revolution is the template for the Internationale..which became the Communist Revolution.

Notice how logical and reasonable all the killing was after the October Revolution in Russia..the Civil war ..the Reds against the Whites and Greens. The later executions of millions. This same pattern repeated in China after WW2. Millions killed by government behest.
How about the killing fields of Cambodia??? Remember that history??
Government at work against its own citizens. How about in Central and South America and the killings of hundreds of thousands over the years..by government backed operations.

I did not say that there are not cruel men in positions of power who will commit such atrocities, I just said that I don't believe the eradication of people is logical or reasonable.

What you have done, once again, is leap to phenomenal conclusions about the wrong thing. Oh, and had another crack at belittling me. That's number three, now, in a single post.

Originally posted by orangetom1999

I was also not advocating for the legalisationof crossbows, just arguing that they are still very dangerous weapons.

Brilliant. You have actually quoted me and altered the above italicised word from what I actually wrote, which was:

Originally posted by The Last Man on EarthI was also not advocating for the illegalisation of crossbows, just arguing that they are still very dangerous weapons.

I find that you'd do this quite incredible, and I have no idea why you think it would strengthen your arguments to do so. The rest of your post is therefore waffle that is not really relevant to what I'd said, especially as I have now said twice that:

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth
Either way, I don't necessarily agree with banning them, I was just pointing out that crossbows are indeed that dangerous.

As an avid history buff, I personally would like one day to own a crossbow. Hence banning them would be a terrible blow to that desire.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
How many others have this same outlook at "Last Man" there? Frankly, just knowing there is one person with that perspective makes me pretty darn sick.

Perhaps I should avoid using recursion in my sentences? Perhaps I should write as if trying to talk to preschoolers, because I did not once claim crossbows should be banned. Perhaps everyone here should try and get off their freaking high-horses and just READ THE #ING POST.


[edit on 5-7-2009 by The Last Man on Earth]

Originally posted by Now_Then

What the hell is that????

Seriously is that a mock up or a photoshop or something? Man that thing is bonkers - looks Russian to me?

It's a Lahti 20mm semi-automatic anti-tank rifle from WWII.

Gotta love war souvenirs

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth you'll notice the crossbow was a scaled-down version of a ballista. It was not designed for hunting, no matter what the modern usage is.

Ballistas Oh yeah

Hunting? Well depends on what your hunting

These are the small ones... we have one that fires 5 at a time

reply to post by zorgon


Those things look like they could take down an elephant!

I was considering the cost of purchasing a full suit of gothic plate today, it runs in about £700 from one site. I think it's a very reasonable cost, and it is just so beautiful!

Originally posted by atlasastro
Ownership is about 15 out of 100 people in OZ, in the states it is about 90 out of 100.
We arn't stopping anyone

Yes, atlasastro, you're stopping 15 out of 100 people from peacefully owning their crossbows. What gives you the right to want to infringe on those people owning them, peacefully?

Your 'moral majority' viewpoint is a pathetic attempt to take away rights from people who want to enjoy their life and leisure their way. Fifteeen percent of the population is not an insignificant number.

Originally posted by atlasastro
Terrajw

Spell my username properly, atlasastro. Your personal vendetta and crusade against me won't work in this thread. The Moderators are watching, indeed some Super Moderators and Administrators are watching. I know that. You know that. ATS has strict decorum rules in place to stop the personal attacks and name calling.

Originally posted by atlasastro
We have tight gun controls, and surprisingly we have alot less deaths to civilians, and cops, from guns. Funny how that works out isn't it.
BTW-when do you think the Govt. Dictatorship will kick in?

Government dictatorship has already kicked in. Pump action and Semi-Auto shot firearms were banned a long time ago. Now, a basic weapon like a crossbow is soon to be banned this September. The government is already taking control. I can't help it if you can't see it.

Originally posted by atlasastro
I am not to worried about this legislation. Kelly is trying to crack down on the NSW Bikie War, they found assault weapons in raids and the current legislation does not have provisions to deal with these weapons.

Ahuh. You're worried about bikies with crossbows, so you want to deny 15 out of 100 people the right to own one?

Hypocritical.

Originally posted by atlasastro
Who revolts against a Dictatorship with crossbows anyway.

Is this an admission from you that crossbows are not a threat? If they're not a threat, then why ban them?

Wow they want the death toll to be high when they leave us to our own devices in whatever tragedy happens...

No Crossbows or maybe even Bows...

Quite insane really

You know the whole reason battery tech and off the grid energy is so resisted right?

They wouldn't want you to be able to use that Microwave of yours or any thing else of that nature and not be able to cut the power...