Hollowpoint

Wieso, bloß weil ich musikalisch einen relativ weiten Horizont habe? Weil ich für die meisten Arten von Rockmusik offen bin? Es muß nicht IMMER Thrash/Black/Death-Metal sein! GRUß

Wann steigst Du denn endlich in die Oberliga auf, Promillo? So ab 9mm Luger aufwärts! DAS ist auch was anderes als immer nur 4,5mm. GRUß

POWERMETAL IST KLASSE!!! GRUß

Nun ja Karaya, vor einiger Zeit hatte VISIER mal 'ne Story berichtet, wo ein Sportschütze von einem Typen denunziert wurde. Angeblich sollte dieser allerlei verbotenes Gerät gehortet haben. Besagter Sportschütze war nicht zu Hause, als das SEK anrückte, nur irgend ein Verwandter (Vater?). Dieser sagte den Beamten, sie möcgen doch bitteschön warten bis der Waffenbesitzer wieder nach Hause kommt. Das hatten die Polizisten abgelehnt, einen Handwerker gerufen und die Panzertüre zum Waffenraum gewaltsam öffnen lassen. Sie fanden nichts verbotenes. Für alle Waffen hatte der Schütze eine ordnungsgemäße WBK. Trotzden wurden alle Waffen beschlagnahmt, weil sie ja nun wegen der zerstörten Tür nicht mehr sicher aufbewahrt werden konnten. Ob und wann der Schütze seine Waffen wieder bekam (und vor allem in welchem Zustand) und ob die Polizei die Kosten für die Reparatur der Waffenraumtür erstattet hatte, wurde nicht weiter bekannt. SO sieht wohl die Realität in D aus, wenn der Denunzierte Sportschütze ist! :evil: GRUß

Außer der anonyme Denunziant behauptet, dass man ein AK-47, ein "Maschinengewehr" oder eine Stinger-Rakete im Keller hat. Dann rücken die wilden Horden des SEK an und betätigen sich erfolgreich im kreativen Wohnungsumbau. GRUß

MEINE Art der Waffenaufbewahrung hatte schon vor dem 01.04.2003 die heutigen gesetzlichen Anforderungen WEIT übertroffen (VDS-Klasse 1). Wenn meine Behörde einen Nachweis darüber haben will, muß sich schon ein Mitarbeiter zu mir begeben und selbst nachschauen! Die Rechnung über den Tresor habe ich nicht mehr und irgendwelche Fotos von Typenschildern werde ich auch nicht machen. GRUß

Heutzutage würde er sagen: "Wer zum Schwert greift, wird durch die Schusswaffe umkommen." GRUß

Er sang auch des öfteren von Waffen: When I was just a baby My Mama told me, Son Always be a good boy Don't ever play with guns. But I shot a man in Reno Just to watch him die . . . Don't take your guns to town, Son Leave yours guns at home, Bill Don't take your guns to town. My name is Sue. How do you do. Now you gonna die! *** I got all shook up And threw down my gun. I called him a pop And he called me a son. We went away with a different point of view. Und er schrieb diesen köstlichen Song, wo er als Arbeiter in einer Autofabrik über Jahre hinweg nach und nach die Einzelteile für einen schwarzen Cadillac mitgehen ließ und dann am Ende feststellen mußte, dass nichts so richtig zusammenpasste und somit fuhr er dann ein totales Unikum. *GRINS* GRUß

SCHADE UM IHN! Ich mochte seine Musik. Wieder ist einer der Giganten des Country&Western von uns gegangen. Jeder hat so seine kleinen Schwächen und Macken. Beim Johnny war es eben die Religion. Da er jedoch Revolver sammelte, war er auf jeden Fall ein GUTER Mensch! GRUß

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63137-2003Sep11.html Missouri ist nun der 45. US-Bundesstaat, der das Führen von Schusswaffen erlaubt. Obwohl der Gouverneur (natürlich ein DemocRAT) sein Veto dagegen einlegte :flatsch: , wurde er von einer Zweidrittel-Mehrheit in State House und State Senat überstimmt :redhole: ! GRUß

45% für die Union ist KEIN Grund zum Jubeln! 18% für die FDP schon eher. Aber damit wird es wohl auf absehbare Zukunft nix werden. Und 10% für die GRÜNEN................... :puke: :puke: :puke: GRUß

Das mit der "deutlichen Kennzeichnungspflicht" find ich gut! Da fällt einem das Boykottieren doch gleich viel leichter!!! :evil: GRUß

Till, unser Boardgewissen, der gute Mensch vom Untermain, stets edel, hilfreich und gut, ein Charakter strahlend wie ein Diamant reinsten Wassers, "Vater Theresius", ein himmelwärts strebender Übermensch, Titan der Titanen..................... Wie konntest Du nur, Sledge.............?!? Ich werde mal Herrn Woytila fragen, wegen der Formalitäten der Heiligsprechung. GRUß

Und wohin haben diese "internationalen Zwangsverfahren", "Danzig" usw. anno dazumal geführt? GRUß

AU WEIA!!! Ich kann's schon beinahe hören: FlopFlopFlopFlopFlop............... Pöfföfföfföfföfföfföfföfföffl............ HustHustHustHustHustHust............. GRUß

Also MEINE Stimme hast Du schonmal für's Kompostieren vom Herrn Professor! Aber hat nicht die Mehrheit der Schweizer damals (war's nicht 1995?) per Volksabstimmung FÜR die Blankovollmacht zur Verschärfung des Waffengesetzes gestimmt? Vor 400 Jahren hätten die Eidgenossen demjenigen, der einen solchen Vorschlag gemacht hätte, gerädert, gevierteilt und ihm anschließend die Bürgerrechte aberkannt. GRUß

DIE Botschaft sollte auch der dümmste und ideologisch verbohrteste US-DemocRAT kapieren!!! GRUß

Die Schweizer sind auch nicht mehr das , was sie mal waren. Der gute Willi Tell rotiert sicher mit 6.000 U/min in seinem Grab! GRUß

The Los Angeles Times September 5, 2003 Blows to Israel Must Never Go Unanswered By Martin Peretz The nation's security depends upon exacting a tremendous price against those who attack it http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion...omment-opinions Jewish history had prepared neither Gentile nor Jew for the cosmic achievements the Zionist enterprise would make in the process of reconstituting a nation. These achievements are easily summarized: the ingathering of a millennially dispersed and diverse people; the regeneration of its ancient and near-moribund language; the fashioning of a lively and democratic polity and press; a genuinely independent judiciary; the mobilization of one of the two or three most proficient and scrupulous militaries in the world; the crafting of a commonwealth curious, open, tolerant — a nation-state not unlike the United States. At the end of a century of unthinkably cruel and ultimately empty revolutions — Nazism, communism — Israel stands virtually alone in the right to assert that, after the crackup of empires and rage for popular sovereignties, it is a success, and a decent one at that. Now envision Israel in its actual neighborhood — the tyrannical societies of the Middle East made even more twisted by corrupting and unproductive oil wealth — and you have a standing reproach to the Arab hubris that lies to itself. From the western Sahara to the deserts abutting the Persian Gulf, not a single regime beyond Israel has so much as even embarked, or allowed its entrepreneurs to embark, on the exacting beginnings of industrial advance. This wide swath of terrain on which a quarter of a billion people live produces with all its hands and brains just about what little Finland or Spain does. Remind yourself also that not one ruler across the region governs by consent of the ruled. Evoke the phantoms of lost grandeur put in the heads of miserable boys and girls by dogma and dogmatics. Mesh all this together and you have some sense of why the West is resented on the Arab street and why, moreover, Israel has not been able to reach, for all its accomplishments, the one quintessential and existential goal articulated by Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, that "the Jew be able to die peacefully in his own bed." And maybe he never will. It may be that Israel is doomed to live dangerously, even if a shooting, a stabbing, even a bombing on a bus or in a mall occurs only every few years. Maybe there is no enforceable peace treaty that can truly guarantee against crackpots and random fanatics. Israel's longtime enemy, and its enemy today, is of the very same terror that was launched on us on Sept. 11, but, if less confounding, more routine and more tolerated. It is the world's acceptance of the routinization of this killing of Jews that has so affronted Israel and its allies. One of the fundamental and actionable principles of Zionism is that Jewish blood is no longer cheap. It follows that the shedding of Jewish blood will not pass without an accounting, without being avenged. And not just for vengeance's sake. But to bring about the elimination of the organized blood sport in Jewish lives. The fact is that Israel has for years vacillated between responding to terror with exquisitely calibrated force and pacifying terrorists by giving them some of what they want — for example, the release of prisoners. The latter option is, of course, always the preferred path of the peace process interlocutors, even the American ones. But, alas, despite the éclat, there had been no actual cease-fire in place since the end of June, although that was the absolute precondition of the "road map." Still, Israel had to pretend, not least of all to its own people, that there was. Otherwise it couldn't go on making concessions to the Palestinians, whether textually obligated or not. And if it didn't make concession after concession, everybody would know that the road map was a map to nowhere. But no one could really pretend either that Hamas and Islamic Jihad had actually agreed to the famous hudna because day after day, week after week one or another of these groups (and sometimes two competing with each other and with the devil himself) would claim credit for some macabre death happening in Israel. The Palestinian Authority itself renounced its obligation to squelch these murderous militias, at once asserting its impotence and claiming that any attempt to fight them would lead to civil strife it could not win. So it seemed almost ungentlemanly for the Israelis to insist that the Palestinian Authority try. After all, if the Palestinian Authority lost, Israel would be without a partner at all in the cease-fire that, as it happens, ceased very little fire, indeed. But the keeping up of pretenses does not advance the cause of peace. Yet it is precisely the keeping up of pretenses that the high-minded folk are always recommending. When Israel sent a helicopter gunship to kill a top Hamas leader in retaliation for the latest Jerusalem atrocity that claimed 21 Israeli lives, a New York Times editorial criticized Israel for its hasty response: "It is far from clear what would have been lost by giving the Palestinians more time." The United States is in great measure responsible for the moral ambiguity of peace-making between Israel and the Palestinians. The Palestinian strategy is terror, pure and simple, like the terror of Al Qaeda and whoever bombed the center of Bombay on Aug. 25. George W. Bush has not quite admitted this, but he has come close. Still, his diplomats behave as if there are two different categories of terror: one with which we can never compromise and another that we will reward with a state. This is a bankrupt program, both morally and practically. The reasonable solution to the Palestine question has always been a partition, and there have been various partition plans proposed since the first one enunciated by Winston Churchill in 1922. Each and every one of them has been rejected, by the surrounding Arab states and by the Palestinians. History moves forward, but not the Arabs. The fervor for Hamas and Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians is an expression of that rejectionism. The martyrology that attends it shows also that it is quite mad. Israel has shown that it is willing to give up territories for a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank. It now must show that it will not tolerate a war of terror against the partition formula that, with caveats here and there, has been accepted since 1922. The chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Moshe Yaalon, warned recently that "every Hamas member must now be considered a candidate for liquidation." Coming in the middle of a declared cease-fire, the Jerusalem bombing that killed 21 civilians has changed the ground rules because the ground itself has changed. It is now abundantly clear that the Palestinian leadership, lubricated into power by the United States, is either unable or unwilling to fight its own terrorists. Its pledge to do so, like its pledge to reform, is either a trick or a failure. It does not really matter which. The defeat of terror takes overwhelming force, and only Israel itself can provide it. Indeed, only Israel should. When Israel undertook to root out the terror network in Jenin last year, it suffered 23 of its own dead, more certainly than the U.S. military would have inflicted on itself in a similar circumstance. Despite this, Israel was pummeled, not least by the United Nations, for committing atrocities that it did not commit. Now everyone knows the truth, although some still perpetuate the falsehoods. But Israel succeeded in decapitating the head of the viper from its body. The rocket attacks of recent days on Hamas leadership in Gaza are an augury of what is about to occur: first, the building of the fence that will secure Israel's population from their inveterate foes and, then, relentless attacks on the armed irreconcilables. These attacks will come from the air and also be fought on the streets, deftly and precisely. There will be ululating mourners and grim-faced youth waving the bloody shirts of their martyrs. But, in the end, they will learn that Jewish blood is not cheap at all and that those who shed it will pay a tremendous price, too high a price to go on with the killing that will bring on their heads only reprisal and not, of course, the prize of a state. Martin Peretz is editor in chief of the New Republic. Nu denn, echauffiert Euch mal schön............................. GRUß

Hurra........... GRUß

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_816233.html?menu=news.latestheadlines Man sollte meinen "So was gibt's doch gar nicht", aber das gibt es doch! :gaga: :gaga: :gaga: GRUß

Boston Globe August 31, 2003 Combat wounds proving less deadly By Robert Schlesinger WASHINGTON -- American soldiers in Iraq are surviving combat-related injuries at a markedly higher rate than in past wars, according to a review of casualty figures from Iraq and other recent US conflicts. Roughly one in seven soldiers wounded in combat in Iraq has died, according to figures released by US Central Command. In previous conflicts dating to World War II, one in every three or four soldiers died after combat wounds. Widespread use of lightweight body armor, improved battlefield medicine, and the lack of Iraqi artillery use have all contributed to the US survival rate, according to medical authorities and military specialists. But that survival rate also may disguise the day-to-day danger level that coalition forces face in Iraq. Since most attention focuses on deaths, particularly those from ambushes and other combat, the higher numbers of wounded in Iraq have drawn relatively little attention. Since President Bush declared major combat operations over on May 1, a US soldier has been killed roughly every other day. During the same time period, an average of 4.5 troops have been wounded in combat each day. According to US Central Command, 1,111 US personnel have been wounded in action since the start of hostilities, including 561 since May 1. Over the same period, 178 have been killed in action, 66 since May 1. According to coalition officials in Baghdad, allied forces are attacked on average a dozen times a day. "Body armor and helmets have been the very big winner on the battlefield this last go-round," said Robert Kinney, who heads the individual protection division at the US Army Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Mass. He added the Iraq war marks the first time the military used ceramic body armor -- lightweight plates inserted into the front and back of a soldier's combat vest -- on a mass scale. That protection has translated into fewer immediately fatal injuries. "We are seeing very few chest wounds and very few head wounds," said Colonel David W. Polly, chief of the Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington. Polly estimated about 80 percent of the wounds he and his staff have treated have been to arms and legs. He said the expected range in combat is between 60 and 80 percent. "Patterns of injury were very different in Iraqi versus US soldiers," Major General Kenneth L. Farmer Jr., US Army deputy surgeon general, told Military Medical Technology magazine in June. "Iraqi soldiers experienced the whole spectrum of injuries: upper and lower extremities, chest, abdomen, and back. US soldiers have had predominantly upper and lower extremity injuries." Troops also have benefited from decades' worth of improvements in combat medicine, not simply improved equipment but also better training. For example, Polly said, during the buildup to the war, the Army put its doctors through a course emphasizing techniques for saving arms and legs. "They tried to get every doctor going overseas to get that course before going," Polly said. In Iraq the Army also made more widespread use of Forward Surgical Teams, -- small, mobile units that can move with troops, cutting down on the time between injury and treatment. Military doctors focus on the first hour after an injury, the so-called golden hour, as the critical time when treatment can make the difference between survival and death. Whereas in Vietnam helicopters carried wounded soldiers to medical bases far behind the front lines, Forward Surgical Teams can move more quickly to the troops. Military physicians also deploy more modern medicine, including antibiotic beads that secrete highly concentrated medicine into wounds and genetically engineered bone morphogenetic proteins, which help heal bones without the need for bone grafts. US forces also have benefited from the fact that most Iraqi attacks have involved small-arms fire, or at worst rocket-propelled grenades, rather than artillery, which has historically been the greatest cause of battlefield injuries. "If your adversary's mainly using small arms . . . there's just a limited number of lethal pieces of metal that are coming at you," said John Pike, from GlobalSecurity.org, a think tank based in Alexandria, Va. While attention has focused on the number of US deaths, critics of the war suggested the larger issue of total casualties is gaining urgency. Jamal Simmons, a spokesman for the presidential campaign of Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida, said that in his campaign appearances Graham has been putting greater emphasis on the issue of US casualties because he increasingly gets asked about it. Barry Posen, from the Security Studies program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that despite the relatively low death rate, the ongoing incidence of casualties will become a problem because of the "morbidity version of the `six degrees of separation' hypothesis," which argues that any two people in the world are connected by no more than six levels of acquaintances. In this case, Posen said, people could increasingly hear about friends of friends getting wounded in Iraq. In World War II, 30.3 percent of soldiers wounded in combat died. That percentage fell during the Korean War to 24.1 percent, and held steady through the Vietnam War (23.6 percent) and the Persian Gulf War (23.9 percent). But the number has declined sharply in Iraq, with 13.8 percent of battlefield wounds being fatal. For American soldiers in Baghdad, the continuing attacks are no surprise -- they do not consider themselves to be in a postwar environment. The troops' uniforms still carry a backwards US flag patch, an indication of continuing conflict. "You really have to be on your toes. No matter how hot it gets, no matter how tired you are," said Specialist Tristan Byars, 23, of San Diego. "When you get complacent, it's like putting a bull's-eye on your chest." One soldier, Byars recalled, survived one attack and was sent back to his unit, only to be hit with a rocket-propelled grenade that took off both of his legs and an arm. Daily, soldiers receive reports of deaths and injuries among colleagues, and many wonder whether they will be next, said Sergeant Nestor Rodriguez, 33, of Puerto Rico. "There are days some of us flip out and say, `I'm not going to make it here; we're going to die.' You just have to calm them down." Susan Milligan of the Globe staff contributed to this report from Baghdad; Robert Schlesinger can be reached at schlesinger@globe.com. GRUß

Vergleiche doch mal folgendes: http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=22 UND http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=48 GRUß

Der Faxschreiber erzählt nicht die ganze Wahrheit, Impulse! Maryland hat eines der übelsten Waffengesetze in den USA! Nur diejenigen von New Jersey und California sind noch restriktiver. :evil: O.K., es gibt kein Bedürfnisprinzip dort, aber ansonsten ist das deutsche Waffengesetz liberaler als das von Maryland. GRUß

More of that stuff: http://kstp.com/article/view/118581/ :gaga: :gaga: :gaga: GRUß