Gun Culture

Friday, September 30, 2005

Annoying child distress flares

Annoying child distress flares, an idea that could catch on?
Charlie Brooker writes in the liberal wankers toss paper Guardian of his dislike of children.

I hate kids. Hate them all without exception. Even yours. Especially yours. Especially if it’s a boy and you named it Jake. And if you’ve ever written a chummy diary article about Jake for a Sunday supplement, I wish nothing short of death upon you. Death by wasps and bombs and razorwire. In a thunderstorm. While Jake looks on in horror. Because I hate parents too.

further

wherever I go, there’s a repugnant Jake nearby; shrieking, kicking the table, bellowing its hot little face off. And sitting beside Jake is Jake’s moron parent, doting on his every noise, dribble and splurt, as though he’s somehow special or charming.

Well, he isn’t. Jake is a selfish, dot-eyed shouting machine hell bent on sabotaging whatever scraps of tranquillity remain in this pitiful world, and every right-thinking person within earshot despises him with a coal-black intensity that would make your head spin like a centrifuge if you ever got wind of it.

As for the most obvious solution - leaning forward and politely asking the parent to curb Jake’s noisier excesses - that’d end in a fistfight.

How true.  Whenever I’ve had recourse to ask parents to reign in their children, say if Bratleigh has been swinging on my tree, invading my garden or vanalising lamposts, I’ve been met with a mixture of looks that could kill, stand up rows in the street or good old fashioned verbal abuse.

This reminds me a little of my most recent encounter with a Chugger.  I resolved long ago to stop being polite to these street vermin but on this occasion it was easier than ever to deflect the horrible blood suckers.

Chugger:  “Do you like children sir?” (chugger clearly expects that EVERYONE just LOVES kiddy-winks and this will draw the victim into a conversation leading to a kill)
Lurch:  “No I fucking hate them.”

Job done.

My dear readers (both of you) will by now have gleaned that the Gun Culture bunker is blissfully childfree.  Even the BBC knows this and has asked if I wish to be interviewed on the matter.  Probably not, but it was nice of them to ask.

Police guidance - sportsman or terrorist

via AirgunBBS
Police have been given guidance to help them spot the difference between shooting sportsmen and terrorists following a number of incidents where sports shooters have been intercepted by armed response units.

THE SPORTSMAN

Wildfowlers operate at dawn and dusk below high-water mark on estuaries/rivers. Fox lampers go out at night, game shooters during the day. Armed with shotgun/rifle, decoys, bag, knife, “priest” (small cosh), stick, machete/ billhook.

Pigeon shooters and wildfowlers wear balaclava/ski mask/camouflage gear. Often have dogs, operate alone or small groups and can act furtively. Vehicle may have blood in rear.

THE TERRORIST

Operate at any time, but usually in built-up areas during busy periods. May be armed with AK-47s assault rifles, RPGs, semtex/TATP explosives, timing devices and Webley revolvers.

Unpredictable. Active Service Units dress conventionally to blend in, often work alone or in small groups. Rarely tell police to “bugger off” when challenged..

Terry is going abroad

Rather sad story the factory which makes the wonderful Chocolate Orange is to close with production moving abroad.  No great surprise as a combination of market forces and government sponsored victimisation of manufacturers drive costs high in comparison with other parts of the world but a great shame.
The chocolate orange was something that as a nipper only came my way at Christmas and Easter, an eagerly anticipated treat.  The products slogan ‘Tap it and unwrap it’ hopelessly misleading.  What they really mean is bash the crap out of it on a hard surface and unwrap it.  Not quite the same ring though.
Lately I have been perplexed by the marketing for this wonderful orangey delight.  To use morbidly obese monster Dawn French to advertise a chocolate product seems a crazy choice.  What are they saying?  Eat our product and you too could look like this?

Or are they assuming that all their customers are fat bastards and so will identify with the pie muncher?

Update:
I notice that Terrys have now updated their advice on accessing their product.  Now it’s “Don’t tap it, whack it”.  Better, but you’re the ones that told us to tap it in the first place.  No good admonishing us for being so stupid as to tap the thing.  Still got the monster advertising it though, a good job she doesn’t put her whole weight behind the whacking as there’d just be a brown splat where the choccy delight used to be.
I wonder if she takes her fees in chocolate?  I wonder if she cocks up the ‘takes’ so she can stuff her fat face with another orange, obviously they need to start the take with a full orange - might as well eat this one then.  I bet the crew never get a look-in.

School right to exclude tosser

I’ve been amazed to watch the developments of the case of a posh Wiltshire school which decided that a disruptive wanker was not conducive to an effective learning environment and declined to allow him to go into sixth form (or whatever it’s called these days).
Firstly I find it amazing that a private institution should need to justify not accepting someones business, as that is effectively what this is.  If my business were to decline to accept an order from a particular customer if he was a pain in the ass then that is no-ones business but mine.  I’m perplexed that the court case went ahead at all.
Secondly I am amazed that anyone could think that he would be anything but a complete wanker - see pic.

This buoffant haired twat needs:

a) a sound thrashing
b) a haircut
c) another sound thrashing

Dunblane Perjury

I received the following from Richard Malbon, Director of The Sportsmans Association, Richard asks that we distribute this far and wide.

Dear Ms Graham

Many thanks for your letter of 23 September 2005, received today. You state that the copy of Graham Capes “statement” that I forwarded to you “would appear to be a third party account or synopsis of his involvment”. Indeed, that is the case. All the witness statements obtained by Central Scotland Police were forwarded to the Crown Office, who then distributed them to the representatives of the parties involved at the Inquiry. Whether the original police statements were summarised by the Crown Office or the law firms involved in representing the parties is unclear. However, what is not in doubt is that the synopsis of Graham Capes statement is an authentic document from the Inquiry.

You further state, “Irrespective of this, any inconsistency between a statement provided during prior investigations and that which is ultimately delivered in Court does not in itself constitute perjury”. Perhaps you could clarify for me what does?

Furthermore, you reiterate what I already know, that Graham Capes was examined by Lord Bonomy in the presence of Lord Cullen etc etc. Firstly, I should advise you that Lord Cullen has stated quite categorically that he was not involved in reading any of the preparatory material from the Inquiry, hence he did not read the synopsis of DC Capes evidence. Why Lord Bonomy did not correct DC Capes is open to question. Mr Bonomy was quick to correct other witnesses who gave ‘incorrect’ information and referred them to their original police statement. I could cite many instances, but it isn’t really relevant to do so. What is relevant is why the numerous legal representatives let this matter pass. That matter is being pursued by my MP on my behalf.

So now that I have assured you of the authenticity of the statement of DC Capes, I will further advise you that I have no intention of letting this matter drop. You go on to state that, “In itself the evidence of Graham Capes is not contentious in the wider context of the Public Inquiry”.

Ms Graham, may I ask on what grounds you make this bold allegation? If you have other evidence relating to the events of that morning, evidence that I know nothing about, please advise me as to why you make this statement that Graham Capes evidence is not ‘contentious’ in the wider context of the Public Inquiry?

On the contrary, I would argue that CCTV evidence about Hamilton’s last known movements on the morning of 13 March 1996 is highly contentious. It would be considered absolutely crucial evidence if Thomas Hamilton had lived and been put on trial for the offences he committed that day. The fact that Thomas Hamilton is dead does not lessen the significance of such information.

May I remind you that Central Scotland Police were given an enormous responsibility and onerous task in being asked to carry out the investigations into the events of that day and if the full truth did not emerge, you will carry the responsibility for that forevermore. I look forward to hearing from you again soon.

Yours sincerely
Sandra Uttley

Ms Graham is with Central Scotland Police, Sandra Uttley is not a shooter but has been campaigning to uncover the truth behind the apparent Dunblane cover up.

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Order lifted on Dunblane papers

Interesting.
There has been much speculation as to the reason for the unprecedented 100 year gagging order on the Dunblane Inquiry papers.  Both shooters and the family of the victims of Hamilton have suggested paedophile ring connections, some say that there is Masonic links hidden by this.
However I think it early to expect that anything of use will come from this, I cannot think that the administration would allow papers to come in to the public domain which cast doubt on the official view that Hamilton was a lawful licence holder gone bonkers.  (shooters believe that Hamilton should never have been allowed a FAC under the rules at the time, he was known to be untrustworthy, had held ‘off-ticket’ weapons and been allowed to put them on his FAC, was recommended for revoking by a police officer etc.  Have a look at the Dunblane Massacre Resource Page for more on the incident, the background and subsequent Cullen Inquiry)

Mr Boyd said some documents would not be published as they could distress relatives

This is sure to mean that the speculation of a cover up will continue.

Jail for beheading video

I’m shocked by this.
A man has been sentenced to sixty days choky for showing a colleague a video of a beheading in Iraq on his mobile phone.
The beak said:

jail was a fitting penalty for the breach of the peace.

Ridiculous.

The beak also said:

I struggle to understand why you had images on your phone entailing the death and degradation of another human being

It doesn’t take a lot of working out surely?  This is merely an extention of something that I think we all do which is rubbernecking at the scene of an accident.  We are fascinated by such things, the psycology of it I have no idea but it is a fact.  I quite understand the girls trauma, when I first saw the video of a man having his head hacked off by a Dirka Dirka I was sickened and the man’s scream was chilling.  It played on my mind for days afterwards, but this does not stop me looking at such things.

60 days jail for this when you see all manner of crimes going pretty much unpunished seems insane.

Mobile Phone Catches Bullet

Background.
An armed blagger raids a jewellers store in Horsham, West Sussex.  Bold, some would say foolish, shop worker Darren Prior gave chase as the man left the scene. 

“He insisted on taking some jewellery items out of the shop, barged past me on his way out, and that’s when I gave chase down the road.”

Mr Prior is shot at

The first bullet missed Mr Prior by inches

“I felt the impact and realised I had been shot. I opened up my jacket to check where, and I couldn’t work out why there was no blood.”

The shot has hit Mr Prior’s mobile phone which has absorbed the impact.
A dramatic story obviously and Mr Prior was lucky not to have ended up very much worse off, but hang on a minute.  Modern mobile phones are flimsy beasts, the shot apparently from close range.  If the shot were a rimfire pistol the phone would have been destroyed and Mr Prior injured.  If the shot were from a centrefire pistol the phone would have been destroyed and Mr Prior very seriously injured.

Looks like an air pistol impact to me.  Still quite a tale, but a little bit hyped perhaps?

African Nation in Prudence Shocker

Burundi’s president Pierre Nkurunziza clearly hasn’t read the hand book of African National Governance.  He’s just ordered his ministers to cancel orders for big assed luxury Landcruisers.
Spokesman Karenga Ramadhani says:

“One Prado consumes 118 litres of oil when it is full. Two full tanks is the equivalent of a minister’s salary (325,000 francs or $313). This is useless spending,”

I presume he means diesel or petrol, pretty sure that Landcruisers don’t burn oil at that rate!

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Fleeing Rita

Over here in Blighty we are fortunate enough that our weather is moderate enough that a bug out in advance of an extreme weather event is unnecessary.  We saw on our tv screens the lines of traffic heading out of the path of Rita, but what was it actually like to be in those lines, what conditions did those folks endure?
Head, over at Head’s Bunker was in one of those lines and gives us his after action report.

Hell
We left at 4 a.m. Thursday morning, our plan was to make it to Dallas where we had family. We never arrived there. We surveyed the traffic reports and the freeway, all was clear in our area. In fact, it appeared that my hope had come to pass- that all the Galveston evacuees had already come through. So we made the fateful mistake of all- we trusted the traffic reports and entered I-45. Huge mistake, and I beat myself up for days over it. We hit traffic just outside loop 610 in Houston and stayed in that traffic for 23 hours.

The freeways were channeled by the authorities, no exits allowed onto any other major roads, and like the overused cliche “sheep to the slaughter”, we joined the ranks of those I swore I would never be among.

Monday, September 26, 2005

Terrorist - a word out of favour?

When is a terrorist not a terrorist?
When he is a Nationalist Guerilla.
According to Reuters anyhow

International monitors gave the British and Irish governments a report on Monday which is set to confirm that nationalist guerrillas have given up weapons used in a 30-year campaign against British rule in Northern Ireland

We have also seen how terrorists in Iraq are ’insurgents‘ and the 7/7 terrorists were just bombers to the BBC.

Is this PC so that we don’t hurt any of those naught bad men’s feelings or is it so that King Tony can declare a victory in the War on Terror?

IRA Decomissioned?

So the IRA have apparently completed decommisioning according to the overseeing body headed by General John de Chastelain.

Questions remain unanswered such as what has happened to these weapons?  Have they been destroyed, if so how?  Or if they have not been destroyed how have they been desposed of?  Sold to the criminal fraternity or on the world wide terrorist market?  How are we to be sure that all these weapons are gone?  Might there be a number of caches unaccounted for containing the very best of the accumulated arsenal?

Frankly who is going to believe that these thugs have really given up for good on violence?

Equal pay madness

This seems crazy to me.
It follows on from a similar claim earlier in the year where NHS jobs were compared to ‘similar’ ones.  The claim was based around sex discrimination; ‘female’ jobs such as nurses, domestics and telephonists were compared to building labourers, maintenance assistants and supervisors.  Now there is a huge great flaw in this that doesn’t seem to have been addressed.
Nurses do not have to be female and labourers do not have to be male.  To suggest otherwise, as the unions are, would seem to me to be sexist.
Nursing and labouring are completely different jobs, the pay scale being known before a person takes up the post.  If you want to be paid labourer wage then become a labourer.  If you want to be a nurse then accept that the pay scale is what it is.  Or did I miss something?
As regards any ‘discrimination’ then the question is simple.  Do men and women doing the same jobs get different pay?  If so then there may be an issue, otherwise piss off and stop whining.

Friday, September 23, 2005

Dad fights off burglars then locked up

In today’s comic Sun Newspaper is the story of an ex-squaddie who apparently fought off three burglars (who were armed with knives).
Lee Wood was no doubt surprised and outraged when he was arrested and locked up for 21 hours, despite reassurance from the self same newspaper that

HOMEOWNERS were given the green light to attack and kill burglars in self-defence yesterday.
Householders are allowed to use any weapon - including a knife or a gun - to protect themselves.
And they can even lash out first if they feel their life is in danger.
Last night Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald confirmed the law IS on the side of homeowners

Mr Wood was even more outraged to find upon his release that the scum had returned whilst he was locked up and looted his flat, smashed the windows and torched his car.

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Navy Rhapsody

Surprised I haven’t seen this before.  Maybe I was asleep.
Anyhow the Senior Service have done a video to the tune of Bohemian Rhapsody.
It’s alright, slightly better than the Amarillo one the boys in the sandbox did anyway.