Hmmm. Hard to know where to start with the irony of The Guardian publishing a piece

[Burney]

So true, b. One wonders whether Uncle JJ ever served with the Wehrmacht in the Netherlands.

I'm just struck by the significance of bicycle theft in your family history. Have you ever had a bike stolen?

[SWv2]

In civilised countries, sw, a chap is innocent until proven otherwise. Of course, one wouldn't expect the pseudo-human inhabitants of Her Majesty's Western Isle to understand concepts like justice and fair play, so your gross calumny is forgiven.

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

[Peter]

I think this is akin to the argument that you'll change the UK's drinking culture by preventing people drinking on the street. You won't because such cultures really aren't that malleable. They will merely adapt.

Clearly America's gun laws fail miserably to acknowledge the fact that Americans want to kill one another in large numbers. That is their failing: they are inappropriate to their society from a public health perspective. I suspect things wouldn't be much different over here were we to have the same laws.

We often make these arguments to suggest that laws wont make any difference because you cant change how people feel. You only have to change how they behave. So the seat belt law did work; banning smoking in pubs was enforced properly (even in Ireland) and people did eventually get used to decimalisation.

It doesnt change overnight but it does change. If there is a genuine homocidal tendency within the average american then it wont change that. After all, if you are willing to break the law by killing someone you are unlikely to be concerned at breaking the law by leaving house with a weapon.

As someone else said, americans dont want it. THey love their guns. I suppose it is none of our business really.

[Sir C]

I'm just struck by the significance of bicycle theft in your family history. Have you ever had a bike stolen?

Not yet; nor have I stolen one. I think we both know what the future holds though, don't we?

[Peter]

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

Might have been a mistake.

[Burney]

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

Maybe he was upset by the slur to his honour? Maybe he was hounded into it by the inhabitants of the village shunning him (as is the wont of backward, rural types)? Perhaps local children were throwing stones at the poor chap? He may well just have despaired.

[Sir C]

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

The faceshooting was as a result of the shame of being suspected, sw, not the shame of his guilt.

What sort of fúcking kangaroo court is this, for Christ's sake?

[Burney]

Not yet; nor have I stolen one. I think we both know what the future holds though, don't we?

Bike theft and suicide?

[SWv2]

We often make these arguments to suggest that laws wont make any difference because you cant change how people feel. You only have to change how they behave. So the seat belt law did work; banning smoking in pubs was enforced properly (even in Ireland) and people did eventually get used to decimalisation.

It doesnt change overnight but it does change. If there is a genuine homocidal tendency within the average american then it wont change that. After all, if you are willing to break the law by killing someone you are unlikely to be concerned at breaking the law by leaving house with a weapon.

As someone else said, americans dont want it. THey love their guns. I suppose it is none of our business really.

We were the first people in the world to put this ban in place.

[Sir C]

Might have been a mistake.

Oh what a surprise, along comes the bleeding heart liberal to side with criminal

Not a thought for the victim, I note.