| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2007/4/18-21 [Reference/Military] UID:46353 Activity:moderate |
4/18 "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be
reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." (The Dali Lama -
May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), "Among the many misdeeds of
the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act
depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest" (Mohandas K.
Gandhi - The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Page 403,
Dover paperback edition, 1983), "That rifle on the wall of
the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of
democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
(George Orwell), "The world is filled with violence.
Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens
should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent
people will lose." (James Earl Jones).
\_ 1) I doubt anyone would disagree with the Dali Lama's statement,
but it's irrelevant to the discussion.
2) Do you really think people in India view a prohibition on guns
as the blackest misdeed of British rule?
3) The other two quotes are just silly.
-tom
\_ 1) It is relevant because you can't shoot back if you don't have
a gun.
2) If they had guns would there have been an armed revolt much
earlier which kicked the British out sooner with less loss
of Indian life and abuse at British hands? We can't know.
\_ Actually Netaji's armed revolt failed. One is almost
greatful that the inane socialism of Gandhi and Nehru
prevailed b/c Netaji was allied with the Axis powers.
\_ Well, remember he did go to the russians first.
it is kind of interesting that his loose canonness
freked out the british enough, they wanted to
assisinate him [so in that sense, he was a bit
beyond the "merely" imprisoned gandhi and neheru].
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4152320.stm
if you want a better candidate for the darkest
aspect of east india company and british [govt]
rule in india, it is the many famines that
ocurred because of the nature of their governance.
[remember the EIC increased the profits extracted
from india over the 1770 famine].
might one not see cooperation with the japanese
army in a slightly different light in the context
of the bengal famine of 1943. if you buy the widely
believed analysis of amarty sen, that puts +4m
deaths partly on churchill's head. and remember
stalin was "our" ally.
Jodi tor dak shune keu na ashe
Tobe akla cholo re ...
http://networks.ecse.rpi.edu/~kartikc/jodi.htm
\_ I am an indian citizen and have shot a gun in india
so i suspect i am better informed on this matter than
you are. the statement above refers to the Arms Act
issued a couple of decades after the indian mutiny of
1857 and proper analogy of that Act would be if congress
passed a statue in the 1850s "clarifying" the 2nd amd
to read "black people south of the mason dixon line
cannot own guns or be employed in gun factories,
unless their masters will vouch for them." this is not
a statement of gun rights but the double standards that
were de rigeur in colonial legislation, and it's
impinging on self determination and soverignty. you
know there is a reason the A in Act is capitalized.
india today, like most of the rest of the world, sees
guns as mostly something owned by cops and the military
and low lifes [the eqivalent of gangbangers ... when
there is a fight, most bring cricket bats, chains and
field hockey sticks and these things that are a cross
between a machete and a hatchet called a "da", but a
few more "professional"/accomplished goondas have
illegal "shoni-night specials"] and some decadent rich
people [i went shooting with this dood on at his country
estate. this guy literally owned a village, his wife was
referred to mostly only partly jokingly as "the queen"...
referred to only partly jokingly as "the queen"...
it was basically a feudal set up]. there is no common
gun culture there, almost nobody has senitmental memories
of shooting cans off a fence post with granddad on the
back40, going hunting with their dogs and buddies etc.
3) Why are they silly? Because you disagree?
\_ 1) You can't get shot at if the screwed-up
college kid can't get a gun in the first place.
Whether guns should be easily available is a
completely orthogonal to whether self-defense
is permissible.
\_ Screwball is going to get a gun. We've had a War on
Drugs for decades and drug use has only climbed and
spawned entirely new levels of violence unheard of
before the WoD.
\_ Uh, drug use is down 50% from 1979. -tom
2) We can and do know that no one sane views gun
control as "the blackest misdeed of British
rule."
\_ I'm glad we all automatically agree with you simply
because to not to do is insane.
3) They're ideological assertions with no meaning. -tom
\_ Funny coming from the one most likely to post
ideological assertions on the motd with no backing.
Did you post #3 as some sort of inside joke?
\_ Still not clear on how the possession of firearms in the current
day and age somehow prevents the gov. from depriving us of our
civil liberties. It certainly didn't help Jose Padilla or the folks
at Ruby Ridge or Waco. In Pakistan, mind you, yes, I can see it.
But here in the States?
\_ Look at Britain. They're headed straight to 1984 and no one
blinks. No guns and looking at knives next. No right to
self defense. No right to assist another in need. Doomed.
\_ Did you take V for Vendetta as a history lesson?
\_ Where is this mythical Britain you are speaking of?
\_ Actually someone yesterday had a very good point. In Iraq
several hundred thousand (million?) lightly armed people
are making a mess of things for the "feds," if you will.
If things every get sufficiently out of hand, maybe you
won't be able to stop the feds, but you and your closest
1 million neighbors might be able to.
\_ What do you see as the odds of the US being invaded/occupied
a la Red Dawn or Iraq? 'Cos I'm betting they're even lower
now than they were in the 80s when we actually had an army
arrayed against us.
\_ I think the odds of the US being invaded are irrelevant
wrt the right to keep and bear arms. The purpose is not
protect the people from invasion (external). The purpose
is to protect the people from our own government acting
against us. The idea is that if the populace is armed,
then the government hesitates to act recklessly b/c the
people could rise up against it.
\_ This undoubtedly made sense in the 18th century when
arms and technology were such that a populace with
access to firearms could effect a revolution against a
tyrannical government (i.e., King George III or his
potential succesor at the time, Kinge George Washington)
but given the military might of the US Armed Forces,
possession of non-military-grade gear translates
quickly into ineffectual resistance; at best, a pop.
with access to light arms and explosives can mount a
guerilla terrorist campaign, esp. if properly motivated
(say against an invading force), but against domestic
authorities? That sounds very much like a pipe dream.
\_ Although I generally agree, that post about the
situation in Iraq made me want to rethink my
position. The Insurgents have given the "feds,"
if you will, a sufficiently hard time. If the
government decides to nuke and pave Baghdad,
then all the AK-47s in the world won't do any
good, but short of something like that, small
arms have allowed generally non-military types
to resist military occupation.
\_ They've certainly made it uncomfortable and
dangerous, but the US Army still has the run of
the entire country and can arrest and detain at
will. The occupation of Iraq is being harried, not
resisted.
\_ I didn't see yesterday's motd, but this is a very very good
point, which occured to me about a year ago, and caused me
to change my mind about the second amendment. I'd always
been against gun control on general principle, but thought
that the idea that random citizens with guns prevented tyrrany
was silly. Now that the Red Dawn scenario is actually playing
out in Iraq, with untrained teenage hooligans bringing the
U.S. armed forces to its knees, I've become a much stronger
supporter of the 2nd amendment, and plan to buy a gun this
year.
\- have you noticed 10x the number of iraqis get killed
as us forces. are you the same person suggesting
your pollution credits should be proprotional to
your production/consumption? and what is bringing
the us army to a halt are explosives and suicide
attacks, and a desire to limit civilian casualties ...
not firefights against people with civilian class weapons.
finally these armed groups in iraq arent doing much
that is productive but just denying stability.
if things became anarchic the neighbors are probably
going to be the problems and the us govt the solution.
the lesson in iraq may be: tyranny is better than
anarchy. the people in the ancien regime were probably
better off than people during the 30yrs war.
\_ yeah, because we really want to emulate what's happening
in Iraq right now.
The idea that the U.S. government is Coming For You is
simply ridiculous. -tom
\_ You trust our government?
\_ if you dont, your choice is to move to canada
or spain, not to buy a gun. besides trust them
to/not to do what? imminent domain your house?
reneg on social welfare safety net? take your
gun away? inject you with syphilis? listen
to your phone calls? watch you search for assp0rn?
\_ The reason I remain a US citizen is b/c I
trust our government more than any other
on this earth. But, that doesn't mean that
I trust our government very much at all.
I, of course, am severely biased b/c I
believe that all government, if unchecked,
slowly expands to take away the rights of
the people who created it. The only check
I see is to instill fear in those who run
the machinery of the government that a
sufficiently enraged populace has the
ability to retake their rights by force.
Is my belief at all realistic? Hell No.
But then again I am a bit of romantic
and may have read too much Thomas Paine,
&c. during my illspent youth.
\_ I trust our government a hell of a lot more than
I trust Charlton Heston. -tom
\_ Didn't answer the question. You're ducking.
\_ The question is meaningless. I think the
likelihood that our government will ever
do anything that I will personally need to
take up arms against is absurdly remote;
far more remote than the real societal
problems caused by easy gun ownership. -tom
\_ "Everybody got a pistol, everybody got a 45 / And the philosophy
seem to be / At least as near as I can see / When other folks
give up theirs, I'll give up mine." (Gil Scott-Heron)
\_ my question of the day is, what does 2nd Amentment has anything to
do with the ban on hand gun? I mean, I don't care about 2nd
Amentment, but I don't see ban on hand gun has anything to do with
it. Our right to bear arm was never limitless, civilians is not
allow to own most of the weapons anyway, i don't see add hand gun
to the banned list alters anything.
\_ Well, to the http://packing.org people handguns are the only practical
guns that can be carried around for self defense. Go argue with
them.
\_ Consider the meaing of the words "shall not be infringed."
While many would agree that the right is not limitless, the
issue is where and how can a limit be drawn. Many fear that
it starts by adding one type of gun to the banned list, and
then another, and still another, and eventually the people
have no guns, the government (and criminals) have all the
guns and the people are screwed.
To think of it another way, first you add one book to the
banned list, then another, and another, finally the whole
library is empty. Would you support that?
\_ That's pretty much a slippery slope argument. It's not
a reasonable argument to tie handguns to rifles. They
are different beasts. Of course some rifles can be
modified fairly easily into a pistol-like size. But
that would also be illegal.
\_ As a non-gun owner and a pacifist I don't really
know what the difference between a handgun and
a rifle really is (other than size). If one seeks
the deterrent effect, it seems that rifles cannot
be regulated b/c handguns are not an effective
deterrent. The logic, therefore, is why regulate
the small potato, when one ought not regulate the
big potato.
I really do not know what the sol'n is to this
problem b/c I see that regulating firearms and not
regulating firearms both make us less safe in
different ways.
\_ There is a saying: "a handgun is what you use to
fight your way to your real gun."
\_ Well handguns are a lot more easily and commonly
used for crime. They are also less useful as
"deter government from fucking with you" weapons.
Silencers are banned because of their criminal
usefulness. It would only be logical to extend the ban
to handguns altogether. A shotgun is probably better for
"home defense" anyway. Someone with a rifle can still
kill a bunch of people, but generally not do the sorts
of massacres that have been getting headlines. Someone
can still snipe people one at a time, or run into some
place with his AK47 but this type of thing is easier
to see, contain and guard against. |
| 5/25 |
|
| news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4152320.stm Printable version British 'attempted to kill Bose' By Subir Bhaumik BBC News, Calcutta Subhash Chandra Bose is garlanded by members of the Free India Legion Bose did not live to see Indian independence The British told their agents to assassinate India's independence war leader Subhash Chandra Bose in 1941, an Irish historian has claimed. Eunan O'Halpin, who has written several books on British intelligence, says the order came after Bose sought support of the Axis powers in World War II. British agents were told to intercept and kill Bose before he reached Germany via the Middle East, Mr O'Halpin says. Bose is believed to have died in a plane crash in Taiwan in 1945. Puzzled Mr O'Halpin says that once they found Bose was planning to oust the British with active support of the Axis powers, British intelligence was given "clear orders" to assassinate him in 1941. It appears to be a last desperate measure against someone who had thrown the Empire in complete panic Eunan O'Halpin In a lecture in Calcutta, Mr O'Halpin cited a recently declassified intelligence document referring to a top-secret instruction to the Special Operations Executive (SOE) of British intelligence to murder Bose. Mr O'Halpin says the British were initially puzzled about the whereabouts of Bose after his escape from Calcutta in January 1941. "They thought he had gone to the Far East, but they soon intercepted Italian diplomatic communication and came to know Bose was in Kabul, planning to reach Germany through the Middle East," said Mr O'Halpin. "Two SOE operatives in Turkey were instructed by their headquarters in London to intercept Bose and kill him before he reached Germany," the Irish professor, who teaches at Trinity College, Dublin, said. Mr O'Halpin said the SOE operatives in Turkey failed to because Bose reached Germany through Central Asia and the Soviet Union. checked back, headquarters told them the orders were intact and Bose must be killed if found." Mystique Describing the decision as "extraordinary, unusual and rare", Mr O'Halpin said the British took Bose "much more seriously than many thought". British documents The document said to be calling on British agents to kill Bose He added: "Historians working on the subject tell me the plan to liquidate Bose has few parallels. It appears to be a last desperate measure against someone who had thrown the Empire in complete panic." Other historians who have worked on Bose say this will add to the mystique of India's most charismatic independence war figure. "Bose would have reasons to compliment himself if he knew that the British were desperate enough to plan his assassination. That's a measure of how seriously they took him," says Calcutta historian, Lipi Ghosh. In retrospect, she says, the British had correctly assessed the potential of Bose. Sugata Bose, Gardiner professor of history at Harvard University and a grand-nephew of Bose. said: "Since he ultimately managed to swing the loyalty of the Indian soldiers to the national cause from the King Emperor, they had all the reasons to contemplate the worst." After 20 years in the Indian National Congress, Bose was elected its president but quit in disgust at Gandhi's plans for non-violent struggle. After reaching Germany he travelled to East Asia in a 90-day submarine journey to set up the Indian National Army from soldiers who had surrendered to Japan. Bose's army fought with the Japanese in the Imphal-Kohima campaign in 1944-1945. |
| networks.ecse.rpi.edu/~kartikc/jodi.htm ekla chalo re If they answer not to thy call walk alone, If they are afraid and cower mutely facing the wall, O thou of evil luck, open thy mind and speak out alone. If they turn away, and desert you when crossing the wilderness, O thou of evil luck, trample the thorns under thy tread, and along the blood-lined track travel alone. If they do not hold up the light when the night is troubled with storm, O thou of evil luck, with the thunder flame of pain ignite thy own heart and let it burn alone. Sound In 1905, during the period when Bengal was to be partitioned, Rabindranath wrote a number of lyrics and set them to music based on folk tunes, especially from baul songs or songs sung by the wandering minstrels of Bengal. |
| packing.org -> www.packing.org/ org gun talk newsfeed Concealed carry database, News tracking, Gun ranges, Events, etc. IN-kuhl-kayat\, transitive verb: To teach and impress by frequent repetition or instruction. Governor Vetoes Concealed-Carry Bill Posted Apr 13, 2007 @ 11:13:48 pm EDT by msolomon News: Anti CCW Kansas lawmakers, trying to stop cities and counties from writing their own tougher concealed carry rules, are now facing a veto from the governor. AmandaPaille101 All United States: Gun Used In Self-Defense? Posted Apr 13, 2007 @ 2:05:07 am EDT by msolomon Defensive Success Story ABC's 20/20 is looking for self-defense stories where a gun was successfully used. tooski91 Washington DC: Appeals Court Overturns DC Gun Ban Posted Mar 9, 2007 @ 5:08:46 pm EST by msolomon Laws: General Gun A federal appeals court overturned the District of Columbia's long-standing handgun ban Friday, rejecting the city's argument that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applied only to militias. GhostOfSteelhorse All United States: URGENT: National Park Carry is STILL ALIVE! Posted Mar 7, 2007 @ 1:36:28 am EST by pvancleave Laws: General Gun This is our best chance yet to get the ban on carry in National Parks dropped. GhostOfSteelhorse Georgia: Georgia Preemption Statute Violated! Posted Mar 1, 2007 @ 11:45:35 am EST by gunstar1 Laws: General Gun State law says cities and counties cannot enact firearm bans, Coweta county says their ban on firearms in county parks is valid. GhostOfSteelhorse Washington DC: Washington DC :: Is there a possibility for debate over legality of handguns in DC? Posted Feb 8, 2007 @ 3:18:52 am EST by msolomon News: Gun-Rights Apparently, Marion Barry (yes, he is still on the DC city council, folks) has proposed "suspending" the all-out gun ban in DC for 90 days for some reason, ostensibly to register those guns currently possessed by citizens. Multi-State CCW class Reno, Nevada Multi-state CCW class (NV, UT, FL permits)valid for carry in over 30 states. Private weekday classes also available (apply the same day - there is no registration requirement because we are not Las Vegas. NRA Basic Pistol Bristol, Virginia This is the class you need to get a concealed handgun permit in Virginia. You will be taught to safely handle, clean and shoot a handgun. Rusty Ramirez - Permit to Carry Training (Minnesota, Utah and North Dakota) Bemdiji, Minnesota Carry in 32 States! Rusty Ramirez, AACIFI Instructor will be offering training in the Minnesota, North Dakota and Utah Permit to Carry at the Bemidji Gander Mountain Store. Rusty's experience in training includes 30 years as a Firearms Instructor/Rangemaster and Training Specialist in the Use of Force and Crisis Intervention. Rusty Ramirez - Permit to Carry Training (Minnesota, Utah and North Dakota) Menahga, Minnesota Carry in 32 States! Rusty Ramirez, AACIFI Instructor will be offering training in the North Dakota and Utah Permit to Carry at the Menahga Senior Center. Rusty's experience in training includes 30 years as a Firearms Instructor/Rangemaster and Training Specialist in the Use of Force and Crisis Intervention. Rusty Ramirez - Permit to Carry Training (Minnesota, Utah and North Dakota) Baxter, Minnesota Carry in 32 States! Rusty Ramirez, AACIFI Instructor will be offering training in the North Dakota and Utah Permit to Carry at the Baxter Gander Mountain Store. Rusty's experience in training includes 30 years as a Firearms Instructor/Rangemaster and Training Specialist in the Use of Force and Crisis Intervention. About ads FAQ * Non-Resident Concealed Carry Permits Q: What states issue Non Resident Permits? A: Click on "STATE CCW INFORMATION" in the header and follow the links there. Finding out which states issue Non Resident permits can help you find the states you wish to obtain. |