Silversnake 1,099 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 If sir bob speaks so passionately for refugees it is only fair to point out the negative side of things too. I don't see what is so bad or stupid about pointing this out. I'd say the legitimate refugees trying to avoid being killed by ISIS are the same as the victims of the attack in Paris, innocent people trying not to get killed by barbaric Islamic extremists. Both are just as worthy of being saved as the other and I'm sure Geldof has just as much sympathy for the French victims of ISIS violence as he does the Syrian victims. So he's entirely logically consistant. Geldof is still an annoying, scruffy tramp though I would love to help the legitimate refugees and leave the scum behind but unfortunately it seems to be a package deal with a large grey area linking them all together. I personally do not criticise sir bob's intentions but imo the results of his intentions are worthy of questioning. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brewman 1,192 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 The 'innocent refugees' once they're settled and have their own ever growing community or communities will crow and crow and push islam upon us and will have plenty of extremists among them. They always have and always will. The furtherance of islam and the prophet is paramount to them. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DogFox123 1,379 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 If sir bob speaks so passionately for refugees it is only fair to point out the negative side of things too. I don't see what is so bad or stupid about pointing this out. I'd say the legitimate refugees trying to avoid being killed by ISIS are the same as the victims of the attack in Paris, innocent people trying not to get killed by barbaric Islamic extremists. Both are just as worthy of being saved as the other and I'm sure Geldof has just as much sympathy for the French victims of ISIS violence as he does the Syrian victims. So he's entirely logically consistant. Geldof is still an annoying, scruffy tramp though But the thing is we have terrorist immigrants posing as refugees and carrying out horrific attacks with so called "European" citizens, how the hell can we distinguish the good from the bad? Obviously we can't, look what's just happened. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
riohog 5,708 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 if this bloody eu thing had kept closed borders like it was yrs ago we wouldnt have this problem .with large movemens of migrants across europe . they should never be aloud to move any further than the first country they arrive at .. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,121 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JDHUNTING 1,817 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league ! maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
blackmaggie 3,376 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 up to 450 jihadists have returned to theses shores according to security services and theses are home grown with british passports and will most likely be the ones who carry out a attack like most attackers being homegrown and with police forces being cut like they have been and theses cnuts being trained to a army standard and have surprise of attack i can sadly see a bigger death toll on theses streets if or when theres a attack the gov need to stop being afraid of this racist /human rights card and start shutting any faith school /mosque that have any links to terrorists and radicalistion and get theses preachers banged up along with the rest of suspects who have returned or who are suspected of being involved in it 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
walshie 2,804 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 The worrying thing is why were 450 jihadists allowed back here? They might be British citizens (on paper) but they have proved they are the enemy. They do their dirty work abroad, then come back here to a nice safe haven where they can sit and plot more shit. And I reckon 450 is the tip of the iceberg. There's also the ones they didn't spot coming and going and the ones that are here waiting in the sidelines. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,121 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league ! maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,773 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league !maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Being a soldier is no guarantee of being a safe firearms handler. Just like being a regular shooter is no guarantee of being competent in a high stress combat situation. Edited November 16, 2015 by Born Hunter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lab 10,979 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league !maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess. This would be the reason someone who has served a minimum of say 10 years would be applicable and not just anyone who has just signed up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,773 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league !maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess. Which a suitable course and assessment would provide... It can even be run by counter terror police. No where has anybody suggested that matey who shoots cans with his air gun and pays 40 quid for an afternoon with a Glock should be given a CCW permit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lenmcharristar 9,802 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ...... Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league ! maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess.who taught the original snipers? Deerstalkers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
unlacedgecko 1,466 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers .......Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league ! maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess.who were the original snipers? Deerstalkers Fixed that for you... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JDHUNTING 1,817 Posted November 16, 2015 Report Share Posted November 16, 2015 In the light of the Paris shootings I think the law needs to change to allow let's say 20% of the general,population of that country carry a concealed weapon ... The people vetted and licensed should be ex firearm police officers and ex servicemen that have done a minimum time in the forces of ten years and were qualified weapon instructors ... If only one person had a weapon in that rock concert the fatalities would have been much lower ......Sounds perfectly sensible to allow people with a long and proven track record to carry a concealed weapon......its the day course Andy Mcnab wannabee,s im not so sure of. It doesn't have to be a day course It could be far more stringent than military weapon handling tests,there will be people who post on here much more competent than a lot of soldiers. I would like to know who the people on here are that are much more competent than soldiers ....... Must admit i found that a curious comment as well ....im sure theres some pretty competent footballers on here as well but im not sure about playing in the premier league !maybe hes just trying to say someone who has spent a lifetime around guns for hunting is just as if not arguably more competent re firearm safety than someone that has just done 3 months basic millitary training. Personally id put more trust in a professional chosen by proven experts in their field than someone who happens to have a knack for shooting animals.....but then im funny like that id prefer to have a wound treated by a professional medical practitioner than someone who had done a first aid course.....its just the little details i guess. First aiders are amateur volunteers there as a stop gap till the professionals arrive, if you were lay dieing in a pool of blood you wouldnt tell tell the first aider to f**k off as you only want help of a qualified surgeon same as youd be happy to see armed civillians if you were in that theatre on friday. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.