 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / April 2007Another Lurker introduction.
Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night simply to sing. We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed. I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and some of the interesting posts that you have here. K. On 18 Apr, 15:42, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > some of the interesting posts that you have here. > K. Hi Kitty, great to see you around again. Draw a chair up and join the cat slave society. I am looking forward to hearing all about your cats in due course too.... S;o) > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and > some of the interesting posts that you have here. Welcome to the group, and bless you for all the work you do, caring for stray and abandoned cats.  SignatureLynne > on Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:42:14 GMT, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > -- > Lynne Thank you Lynne. I see it more as a duty to them than a chore, I assure you. They are such good company & so badly treated at times. My, I had no idea that introductions could be so volatile. It most certainly wasn't my intention. I find it it nice to see that sometimes that sometimes even though you don't agree with one another, you can at least leave the animosity with the issue, rather than let it fester within the group. I think I am going to enjoy myself here far more than I initially thought. Thank you to all of you & I look forward to getting to know you all individually. I see we have many interesting characters here. K. On 18 Apr, 15:42, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > some of the interesting posts that you have here. > K. i want lots of photos of all these kitty pusses, lots and lots of them, particularly this fellow called rory cos he sounds like a real rascal. which CP group do you help with? bookie > On 18 Apr, 15:42, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > - Show quoted text - That's ok Bookie, but thanks all the same. Actually, I have been waiting for weeks for Nanacy to say something about old Ringo. Her silence spoke volumes. I know how she feels.,Anyhow, how can any self respecting American possibly understand that we don't have cyoties, rattle snakes, bears, & not all of us live in the middle of cities with cars and jugernaut's & roads that our cats have to cross just for the sheer hell of it? They Can't know, so they don't understand....Simple!! Actually, I live in a sleepy village ,where the most news worthy event is who won the veg growing competeition this year...other than Ringo and his poor friend's being blasted by the children from hell of course! It is "not Normal" to keep your cat indoors over here. When I tell other villagers that I keep my cats indoors, they give me queer looks & you can read their faces saying, "what the hell do you do that for"? I'm fed up with explainig that it is because I am frightened for them, because the stares get even stranger... It is much easier to tell them it is because I have pedigree cats. They seem to understand that one a bit more & just give a nodding comiseration instead. As you say, Ringo didn't understand what confinment meant before coming here, so it is totally alien to him, & somtimes he hates me for it ... The nonchalent waging tail flick gives it away you see... I have come to the conclusion that it would be wicked of me to take away his liberty. He has a right to it, but I also have a duty of care to him, so I have decided to come to a compramise. I am having our garden surounded with anti cat mesh so that all of our cats can have a bit of liberty rather than the chosen few. It seems the best solution I believe. In the meantime, Both Ringo & I have come to an agreement. He is allowed out, but only whilst someone is out there with him. When we come in, so does Ringo. This is at least until I can come up with the funds needed to do the entire garden. I did think about canceling xmas, but the kids didn't think that was a very good idea, so I will have to come up with some other ideas,... (possiblly renting out Paul as an escoert perhaps?) Hmm, now there is a thought.....LOL <rubbing my hands with glee @ the very thought of it all> Back to Americans, & what they don't understand I believe...Now, you must talk about us in the same way that we talk about you too. I think we call it a difference in culture, rather than a difference in opinion. For instance, over in USA, you have had a dreadful tragedy regarding a gun toting freak roaring through a university in Virginia? ( with my own daughter @ uni, I shudder @ the very thought).... Well I can't tell you the sorrow that we feel for those kids that were taken so needlesly, or the teachers either, not to mention what their families are going through.. it is harrowing & it is dreadul for them all. But this is not the first time it has happened over there, is it? It has happened several times, & we Brits find it incredible that you haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke about taking your rifel to the grocers, but she has a better knack of being sarcastic than I do... Please don't mistake what I say as a comparison, because it simply isn't one @ all!! We abhor the loss of life inflicted, point blank!! My point was, that we don't understand one anothers culture, so we shouldn't knock it until we know better than to. I am telling you that we are ignorant to your ways, & the same is relative to you all in the USA too.Bookie jokes about us both & our ways as well, but she does carry the truth in her words all the same. Our younger genration carry knives because of the consequences of being caght with a gun..We have a very healthy fear of them here. When Ringo was shot, all be it with a BB Gun.. it was a very news worthy event!!! Yes, kids do have them. But most of the kids that own one, have a father or some mentor that would over see what they do when using one. Of course we have inadequate parenting, hence what happened to Ringo. Ringo was really did get a raw deal that day. It isn't every day that we have gun toting teenagers shooting cats willy nilly over here @ all. When you consider that he had no chosen home for several months before we let him in, you will see that it was the fact that he was in the wrong place @ the wrong time. It could have happened to any cat, & did for several others too. I wasn't seeking sympathy here when I posted at all. If anything, I think I felt outraged by it & I was telling others to be aware that this can happen to their cat. However Cyber, I take your point & I can assure you that if this ever happened again to ANY of my cats, whilst they were in the sanctuary of our garden, I would rip the head off the idiot who was stupid enough to threaten my cats liberty, small as that might be... S;o) > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people > that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation.... Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?! Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just might pull out a gun and start shooting back. Hugs, CatNipped >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > CatNipped If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons holder which I am proud to be a member Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years only 158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is 158 in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%. If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use even if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are fooling themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on our nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts > >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > - Show quoted text - thing is they may be able to kill alot more people in one rampage if they had a gun than if they were running around waving a baseball bat or similar offensive weapon. we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely available as it seems to be in your country. > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to > wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely > available as it seems to be in your country. By now, for the U.S., it's a matter of cultural legacy. Suppose the U.S. were to pass stiff gun control laws... what would be the result? There would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts; they would continue to own guns and dare the gov't to come take them away. Even if the gov't prevailed, any confiscation process would take decades to reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one. Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they are with their guns. Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon. If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might not have killed so many people. The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board. Charlie On 21 Apr, 00:21, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com> wrote: > > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider > > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious > criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one. I agree with you now that I know a bit more about it. > Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for > those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who > are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It > might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political > gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they > are with their guns. ( Who are the NRA?) A very good point you have made here. In fact I think it would be a very good idea to introduce that idea over here whilst they still have the opportunity to. There are stringent controls here regarding an application for a gun licence, including character backgrounds, references, the need to renew that licence on a yearly basis, & a general background check by the police who come out to visit you & interview you before they will issue you with one..... In fact it goes further than that. The housing of the gun & ammunition are also a major concern to the Police, so you have to be able to prove that it is stored in an appropriate locked & sealed cabinet so that no one can get to it except you. That way if something does go wrong, you are to blame, end of story. It's your gun & your responsibility to ensure it stays that way..... The competency idea should be introduced, so that there is yet another chance for any psychotic freaks might be recognised in training, rather than when they are firing rounds off @ fellow pupils. that was a terrible shame for all concerned.;o( > Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to > have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon. > If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might > not have killed so many people. Actually charlie, we have already experienced an introduction of this already over here. We have sky Martial that board air crafts so that if any freak tries to hijack it, there is a pair of marshals to ensure the safety of the passengers should the need arise... Some schools in London have recently had armed police in schools where there is a threat of gang gun culture already growing there. I find it horrific that things have gone this far. But I far prefer that, to the thought of my child getting caught in the middle of it. I think Bookie has already pointed out, that if they are of dubious character, the youths prefer carrying knives.. but the incidents of gun drive by shootings is happening over here. Also, quite recently there have been 3 deaths in young boys for what appears to be no reason at all, other than that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time!! > The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the > Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board. OMG!!! I did check it out. It is a horrific story, isn't it? 45 killed & 58 injured, and all of this was done by the man that was supposed to be the school board member, Andrew Kehoe...Dreadful. He blew the school up, murdered his wife and set bombed his house to pieces including his wife and his entire animal stock which he made sure couldn't escape!!!!! , then drove towards the school & called over school superintendent & blew himself up & him too... Now that is really sick. I guess wee just live in a sad society that really does need addressing. but how does one go about filtering the lunatics in society? A really sad story, made horrific by the acts of a deranged idiot...Those poor young children. We have to do the best that we can to understand one another & stop the ignorance of everyone, & that can only be achieved by sharing experience & knowledge too... Knowledge is power & we could all do with a few lessons on other peoples cultures, to know what they are & are & respect them... S;o) > ( Who are the NRA?) The National Rifle Association... the public face of U.S. gun nuttery. >> Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense >> to have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > any freak tries to hijack it, there is a pair of marshals to ensure the > safety of the passengers should the need arise... Yeah, the U.S. has a system like that too, for airliners. But there are a lot of places besides airliners where people can go berserk. In a culture where psychotic freaks can buy a gun with no questions asked, it might be a good idea to encourage responsible private citizens to carry concealed weapons. ? I think Bookie > has already pointed out, that if they are of dubious character, the > youths prefer carrying knives.. I'll bet they would prefer carrying handguns if they could get them. >> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out >> the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > in a sad society that really does need addressing. but how does one go > about filtering the lunatics in society? It can't be done. The best that can be done is to aim for policies that reduce the likelihood that lunatics will be able to carry out murderous schemes without intervention. But what those policies might be is not as certain as political ideologues might wish to think. Charlie On 21 Apr, 08:53, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com> wrote: > > ( Who are the NRA?) > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Charlie > I'll bet they would prefer carrying handguns if they could get them. Your right. Now that I am not quite so ignorant (but still somewhat confused..), I can explain that rightly or wrongly, that is why we Brits get so angry with the USA & their Gun Culture. We blame our youths for trying to emulate some type of gang warfare culture that you would expect to find in the Bronx, is already up & running in the UK. It is mostly in Cities of course such as London, Manchester, Birmingham ect. It tends to be racial;when I say racial, it might be the West Indians fighting for rights/access to drugs, or simply fighting over girlfriends- always trivial....... The point is that I am reliably informed that for as little as £50 ($100), you can get your hands on a hand gun. Our kids are buying them too, which is why it scares us so much. There are absolutely no checks, any child can get their hands on one if they know the right people. It is terrifying really when I think about it. We may have stringent rules regarding the ownership of a legal weapon, but we can't do a damned thing regarding our kids buying black market ones. It would seem that these days, some of the youth of today are willing to take that risk & face the consequences *IF* they are caught..... So baring this in mind, you will see that even the hard line laws don't stop anyone who is determined to get their hands on one. As with everything else in the world, it is not so much what you know as who you know. The only good thing about having these laws in place is that we don't see carrying a gun or even owning one as an every day normal thing. 99% of us have no idea what a hand gun looks like or how to work one either. this can only be a good thing right now. However, if guns do become prevalent in the UK, then we will have to re think our laws & how to apply them.... I knew as my fingers crossed the keyboard that I was picking up a damned Hot Potato, what I didn't realise was that it would burn so many of us... It is a very controversial subject..... S;o) on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:21:09 GMT, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> wrote: > Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing > for those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out > people who are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such > programs. It might also get the political support of the NRA, because > the political gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and > responsible they are with their guns. Charlie, I have always found your posts to be insightful and intelligent, but I have to take issue with the above statement. The NRA is the _reason_ we have easy access to guns, often with no waiting periods and shoddy background checks. I am a gun owner, but I am a proponent of much stricter laws regarding the purchase of deadly weapons and therefore will *never* be affiliated with the NRA. Here in Kentucky and in many states, I can walk into a store, pick out a weapon from a tiny .22 pistol to an assault rifle, or an assortment of guns *and* ammunition, sign a form that says I am sane, show my drivers license and walk out with my purchase 5 minutes later after they make one phone call to a database which has been restricted from gathering accurate information. That's exactly how the NRA wants it. <spit> Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing, accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow, but I am certainly not going to hold my breath. The gun lobby in this country is sickening to me, and we all know our politicians have no backbones. I support the right to bear arms, but I do not support the right to bear arms indiscriminantly. SignatureLynne "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly We are brave enough to bend to cry And sad enough to know We must laugh again" ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech > Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back > reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing, > accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow, > but I am certainly not going to hold my breath. You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out of this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore ineffective. I may be wildly optimistic in thinking the NRA could be brought to support competency training/certification as a mandatory condition of owning guns. I see it as the most politically possible route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even so I don't really expect it to happen. Charlie Charlie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> >You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out of >this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even >so I don't really expect it to happen. Interesting that you'd say that, Charlie, 'cause here in Massachusetts that is exactly how it's done. Before you can apply for a handgun permit for ANY reason, not just concealed carry for defense, you must complete a state certified course on gun handling. Even though I got my Mass. permit long before that was a requirement and was "grandfathered" in as exempt, my wife and I both took the course since all other states that require a course for CCW issuance accept the Mass. course (and I'm legal for CCW in most states). The course, BTW, was NRA sponsored and taught by an NRA certified instructor. It consisted of home study, lecture, written test, and a demonstration of proper gun handling at a range. Quite easy, actually. I was surprised that in a class of about 20 people, I was the only one who got 100% on the written test. Even my wife only scored 98% (and she'll never hear the end of it). I was even more surprised that the lowest score in the class was an ex-cop (well, maybe not THAT surprised). Then we went to the range and had to demonstrate competent gun handling, one on one, with an instructor. Each person fired a total of 50 rounds, 25 from a .38 revolver....25 from a semi-auto. There were a lot of novice shooters who were barely hitting the target (which was still passing). The revolver was kinda crappy and the sights were a little off, but after the first shot I adjusted point of aim and put them all in the 9 and 10 ring. Then I warned my wife about the sights and she put most in the 10 ring. The instructor used her target as an example of how it should be done. The semi was a cheap little Czech 9mm but a damn sweet little shooter. I drilled a 1" hole dead center in the target. Then my wife steps up and drills a 1 1/2" hole. The only person who actually missed the paper was (you guessed it) the ex-cop. So, was there a value to the course? I suppose so. At least it exposed new shooters to proper gun handling. But it certainly did not produce anyone who I'd want backing me up in a firefight. Since then, my wife and I have become Mass. State and NRA certified instructors. Three times a year we teach a Women Only defensive handgun course. By the time we're done with them, we've put another 15 deadly bitches on the street. But that's another story. Some of the ladies, here, might be interested in checking out Kathy Jackson's web site. http://corneredcat.com/ > Interesting that you'd say that, Charlie, 'cause here in Massachusetts > that is exactly how it's done. Before you can apply for a handgun permit > for ANY reason, not just concealed carry for defense, you must complete > a state certified course on gun handling. I think more states should roll out such programs. This guy in VA had a history of mental problems, but the people who knew him agreed that his condition deteriorated sharply in the weeks before the shootings. By the time he bought his guns, he might have been too mentally disorganized to sign up for and complete a firearms safety course. I saw a picture of the express packet he sent to NBC... the writing was barely legible, he got the address wrong, and he added an extra digit to the zip code. Charlie on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:04:38 GMT, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wilkes@users.easynews.com> wrote: > I think more states should roll out such programs. I couldn't agree with you more. SignatureLynne "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly We are brave enough to bend to cry And sad enough to know We must laugh again" ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech On 22 Apr, 10:04, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com> wrote: > > Interesting that you'd say that, Charlie, 'cause here in Massachusetts > > that is exactly how it's done. Before you can apply for a handgun permit [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Charlie Agreed! Mind you, most things we think about are in hindsight.. Wow!! That was observant of you. We only got a 2 second slot look at it on the news over here & they didn't bother to point that out. I think they should have really because it was relevant... S;o) on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:44:37 GMT, sheelagh > That was observant of you. We only got a 2 second slot look at it on > the news over here & they didn't bother to point that out. I think > they should have really because it was relevant... Obviously the guy was mentally deranged, but I don't think his writing when he sent that package was indicitive of whether or not he could take and pass a firearms safety course prior to his killing spree. When he sent that package, he had just killed 2 people and was preparing to kill as many more as he could. Based on other information that has been shared about him, he probably could have passed a firearms safety course prior to April 16. He was described by the gun shop clerk as polite, and he was practicing at a firing range. Based on his mental health history, he shouldn't have been able to get a gun in the first place according to US Federal Law. There is an instant so-called background check system in pace which was developed by the friggin NRA, but that background check is virtually useless. That's why he was able to get those guns. SignatureLynne "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly We are brave enough to bend to cry And sad enough to know We must laugh again" ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech >There is an instant so-called background check system in >pace which was developed by the friggin NRA, but that background check is >virtually useless. That's why he was able to get those guns. The mental health records were not allowed to be entered into the computer database thanks to HIPAA and the privacy rights lobby. Also add into that the way the friggin judge ordered Cho to get counseling provided a loophole to prevent those records from being entered or to have Cho's parents notified that he was a loon - he should have been COMMITTED, rather than allowed to get "outpatient" help. Signatureannoyed@net.spammers Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Lynne <unmonitored.email@gmail.com> >Based on his mental health history, >he shouldn't have been able to get a gun in the first place according to >US Federal Law. There is an instant so-called background check system in >pace which was developed by the friggin NRA, but that background check is >virtually useless. That's why he was able to get those guns. Error #1) The NRA makes a convenient target, but they had nothing to do with the design of the NICS check. Error #2) The NICS check has been quite effective in blocking gun purchases by people with criminal records. If you want to blame a group for the lack of Cho's mental health records being in the database......blame homosexuals. It was their efforts to keep medical records related to AIDS out of government databases that resulted in laws that make it illegal for the FBI to maintain personal records on ANY forced hospitalization for mental illness in the NICS database. What we have here is "The law of unintended consequences" in action. Error #3) He was able to purchase the guns because when he got to the question on the Federal form that asked "Have you been hospitalized for mental Illness?", He checked "NO" instead of "YES". It's that simple! - -------------------------------------- A Virginia Tech official, in 2006, praised the defeat of a proposal to allow students with state-issued concealed handgun permits to carry their handguns on college campuses in Virginia. When the bill was killed in committee, Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hinckler was quoted as follows: "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus." > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Error #1) The NRA makes a convenient target, but they had nothing to do with > the design of the NICS check. You threw me for a second, I know NICS as BCI/NCIC. But you're right, politicians designed it. If you want something to get completley f.cked up, let a politician touch it. > Error #2) The NICS check has been quite effective in blocking gun > purchases by people with criminal records. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > forced hospitalization for mental illness in the NICS database. What we have > here is "The law of unintended consequences" in action. No it wasn't our fault. It wasw the insurance companies trying to dip into the information. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: T <nospam.kd1s@cox.nospam.net> >> If you want to blame a group for the lack of Cho's mental health records >> being in the database......blame homosexuals. It was their efforts to keep [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >No it wasn't our fault. It wasw the insurance companies trying to dip >into the information. A valid point. Lets just blame the US government. If we'd just stayed out of the Korean war, South Korea would be under the control of Kim and Cho would never have been able to come to the US. Of course, we all know that Sarah Brady caused the Virginia Tech incident. She's been saying that guns are evil for so long that Cho must have felt that he wasn't an a.shole, his GUN was an a.shole. :) On Apr 21, 3:41 pm, Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com> wrote: > > Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back > > reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Charlie You mention guns, then here come the nuts Nomen scored 100 on his gun test haha, I wouldn't have told that >> Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back >> reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even >so I don't really expect it to happen. Charlie, You may not be aware but the founding of the NRA in 1871 was originally as a training organization to teach our soldiers and civilians how to become marksmen. Part of that also involves knowing what is your target and what is beyond it so you do not shoot in an unsafe direction. The NRA also conducts police marksmanship courses as well as civilian training for recreation, hunting and personal protection. The NRA has a program called "Eddie Eagle" that is a non-political and gun-neutral safety program for kids - it does not teach gun handling or shooting but rather gun *avoidance*. It teaches the simple message that if a child finds a firearm that they must do four things: 1. Stop! 2. Don't Touch! 3. Leave the area! 4. Tell an adult! Most government indoctrination centers^W^W^Wpublic schools refuse to allow that message to be presented to children because of the letters N,R, and A. Instead those schools prefer teaching kids how to put taxpayer-funded condoms on dildos and call that "safety education". Looking into the other aspects of a culture of violence is required, such as the influence of movies and television from "Hollyweird" that glorify violence with firearms along with the "Michael Moore-ons" of the world that further berate non-criminal gun ownership, and "Gangsta Rap" that promotes drugs, violence and degradation of women as illustrated in their "music" & videos. A culture of latchkey kids with perhaps little parental guidance (how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a parent? Will the ACLU support that?) and lots of gang-pressures tempting kids into a subhuman subculture rather than "readin' writin' & 'rithmatic" that would make them become productive and healthy members of society. Signatureannoyed@net.spammers Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl > how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a > parent I'd LOVE to see that, a license to breed! SignatureLynne, dreaming "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly We are brave enough to bend to cry And sad enough to know We must laugh again" ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech > on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:52:14 GMT, anno...@net.spammers wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech I couldn't agree with you more.... S;o) >> how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a >> parent > > I'd LOVE to see that, a license to breed! I would vote for it > Lynne, dreaming > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech On Apr 23, 12:52 am, anno...@net.spammers wrote: > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:41:28 GMT, Charlie Wilkes > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > anno...@net.spammers > Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl what is there to know or learn about raising a child you goto work and buy the food, or you grow it you don't be out ripping up in the bars, druggin, stealing, lying, cheating etc.. You love your children, encourage them... What am I missing? we have to tell women to love their children? no what people need is 2 things, some need both, some need one or the other. 1. education 2. help/secondchance/support sometimes people just need help, no questions asked, no changes to go through just to get that help is just my opinion > On Apr 23, 12:52 am, anno...@net.spammers wrote: >> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:41:28 GMT, Charlie Wilkes [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > > is just my opinion Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make sense ;-) > Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make > sense ;-) my eyes look 2 raisins in a glass of strawberry milk whipping this music, hands must obey my mind fe fe fe fe fe fe fe <--fast that's the sound the cats make on the back of my chair cats purr for their own pleasure? I think they're just happy like we get happy like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could have something to do with a broom in my hand. >> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make >> sense ;-) [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could > have something to do with a broom in my hand. Keep it up Barry you will make someone a good little woman one day ;-) > >> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make > >> sense ;-) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Keep it up Barry you will make someone a good little woman one day ;-) me? in touch with my femininity? is that what you're saying? lol >> >> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to >> >> make [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > me? in touch with my femininity? is that what you're saying? lol We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress Nick and the others ;-) Oh I got one we know you dress up as Hillary Clinton on the weekends also ;-) > We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress > Nick and the others ;-) > > Oh I got one we know you dress up as Hillary Clinton on the weekends also > ;-) you on thin ice jumping up and down slim >> We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress >> Nick and the others ;-) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > you on thin ice jumping up and down slim Hah so you mean it is true ;-) Just messing with you old man :^) There > would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts I think that's putting it mild. Next thing you know the price of guns would sky rocket they'd be sold on the DL (down low) like dregs > > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider > > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious > criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one. So true. I'm of the Charlton Heston "You'll pry my gun from my cold, dead hands" camp. The issue that you gloss over entirely is the illegal gun market. That's one that would take a very long time to put down. > Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for > those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who > are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It > might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political > gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they > are with their guns. In Rhode Island you're required to obtain what is called a blue card before you can purchase a handgun. This involves taking and passing a written exam. The blue card is valid for the lifetime of the holder. This is not a permit to carry, simply a handgun safety course that all legal handgun owners must have. > Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to > have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon. > If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might > not have killed so many people. I used to work at the state attorney general's office. The chief and deputy of the Bureau of Criminal Identification both carried weapons. When you entered the building you're in a glass fishbowl. That glass is bulletproof. I can recall sitting in the deputies office one day and noticed a sampling of the glass with lots of indentations and a couple of outright holes. Each was circled and labeled with weapon type and caliber. We found out that certain rifle rounds would go right throug bulletproof glass. Got to love a field test. > The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the > Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board. Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little safer. >> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out >> the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board. > > Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except > yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little > safer. I don't think so. Look at the way people drive. And, more to the point, carrying a gun would not have prevented the incident mentioned above. Gun-toting freaks are just one of many risks in life, and having a gun under your jacket won't do a damn thing to protect you from most of them. Charlie > In article <pan.2007.04.20.23.21...@users.easynews.com>, > charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com says... [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little > safer. > Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except > yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little > safer. Good God, when I brought this issue forward for debate, I had no idea what a nest of snakes I was opening..... > In Rhode Island you're required to obtain what is called a blue card > before you can purchase a handgun. This involves taking and passing a > written exam. I think that this an excellent idea & one that our law makers could/ would or should consider in the UK. However, I can only see this as workable in the short term.- when I say the short term I mean that it might work for say the next 30 years, possibly less. The reason for this is because with time, comes change of the younger generation & their tolerant views which it would appear that you all in the USA seem to call a liberal view? Correct me if I am wrong..! I would like to think that if that time did come to pass that it would be mandatory for us all to have to take a similar test, but reality dictates that in 30 years, we will have an entirely different set of views because with time, comes change & with change comes different possibilities and realities. Nevertheless, one thing that has always been there & readily available to all if they search far enough.. The black market is just as readily available to the psychotic & this is where the reality of the problem lies... In the "Real World", the black market is there to supply the illicit and the unobtainable, whether it be a national insurance number, passport, drugs or arms. Even our governments indulge in such issues, so whether we like it or not, corruption is here to stay. For one instance of our own government in the UK, you have only to look at the enquiry of arms sent to Sierra Leone, in exchange for rights to extract minerals that are abundantly rich there, & our own resources are now depleted in the North Sea where we have been living off the fat of the sea, & now we pay the price for our indulgence for all of those years... They ( The black Market) will always be the scourge of the world & also always be there & readily available to those who are determined to obtain the gun licences they seek to get round the system. It has always been there, & however hard any government tries( or pretends to try), this market will be there. It has existed since written records began in one form or another, & I honestly can't think of a way to eliminate it. Take prostitution. It is one of the more tolerable illicit illegal trades. it has now got to the stage where we feel that the time has come to legalise it because of circumstance.. which is what my point was when I told you that with time, comes change and tolerance of our views. There is also the plague of aids to consider, which is why I feel that anything that we try and introduce now, will not be altogether relevant in the future. I think that the conclusion to this debate is, that however well meant our intentions are, we can't stop the inevitable which is sad but true.... S;o) > >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a > sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts- Hide quoted text - Gee, are you seriously arguing that the Virginia Tech shooting, or Columbine, or a host of other incidents, would have been MORE bloody if the perpetrators hadn't been able to get guns? If they'd been limited to knives, baseball bats, or their bare hands? Really? Now, if someone else present had A)had a gun, B)known how to use it correctly, and C)remained steady enough to do so effectively, THAT might have made the episode less bloody. The thing is, though, relatively few people actually have enough training and experience to do that, in those circumstances. But, call me crazy, but with or without the presence of some level-headed individual with a gun, least bloody of all would have been for Cho to have been denied access to weapons, and to have been given the mental health care he so clearly needed (and which school authorities had tried to get for him.) Lis >> >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would >> >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > Lis Good points but here is what I learned in college. When a sick'o like this can't full fill his desire for massive blood shed. They turn into themselves and become more delusion and tend to act out their fantasy with more precision and determination. Hence the more bloodier the crimes. They tend to act with more care and sickness in their plots. But there is a good thing most turn on themselves > >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > - Show quoted text - However civilized we think we are, there a million maniacs that don't agree with us Matthew. Now that I have had a couple of damned good reasons why this is so unworkable for you, I respect your need to keep them. However, I would be most interested to hear what the" Right to Bare Arms" debate that Catnip mentioned though....? When you produce figures like that Matthew, how can I argue with you, lol? Ignorance is certainly not bliss & each animal has to fight for their place, including us too. I see your need to keep your guns now that we have debated the issue. It was our ignorance that blinded us to the facts, which was why I brought the subject in the first place. I can see that your laws work, It is just a shame about the crazy idiots that lead others to believe that this is an almost daily occurrence..... Thanks for the education lesson here..(truely!!) S;o) > > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the "Patriot > Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation.... Um, see, this is the kind of thing that helps convince Europeans we're all nuts over here. We do not generally have RPGs, tanks, or Warthogs. We do not have the SERIOUS military weapons that would allow citizens to defeat a serious military action by the federal government--or by state governments, even. And even the NRA isn't seriously advocating that we should. > Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every citizen > must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law. > Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell me > the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have > thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?! The Virginia Tech killer bought his gun legally. The Columbine killers were able to get their guns because there are no background checks for gun sales at gun shows. If the NRA didn't so bitterly oppose even minimal regulation to limit the availability of guns to criminals and the mentally unbalanced, we'd have fewer anti-all-guns types, too. > Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed > weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths have > second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent > bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just might > pull out a gun and start shooting back. Um. Crime has gone down in other places, too. There just isn't a clear trend on this in the statistics. Which is really the important point; guns aren't nearly as significant as either the pro- or the anti- forces believe. Lis >> > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would >> > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > state governments, even. And even the NRA isn't seriously advocating > that we should. Um, Iraqis seem to be giving our army quite a run for their money right now - and they have nothing but guns and home-made bombs, not tanks or Warthogs. A guerilla force is the hardest thing in the world to overcome - we took our freedom from England with the first guerilla army in history. Also, it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where the US army would use bombs for indiscriminate destruction on American soil, so for these reasons, armament is a non-issue. >> Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every >> citizen [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > minimal regulation to limit the availability of guns to criminals and > the mentally unbalanced, we'd have fewer anti-all-guns types, too. It's also amazingly easy to buy a gun from a criminal thus bypassing *ANY* type of check, again passing restrictive gun laws sounds really nice in theory (and I truly wish it was that easy), but it's a case of shutting the barn door *LONG* after the livestock has escaped. There are *SO* many illegal guns in our nation that it would impossible to round them all up. Again, and I can't stress this enough, laws that may be obeyed by responsible citizens will be totally ignored by criminals and we'd end up with all the guns being held by criminals (who would then have a field day while using their guns *KNOWING* that honest citizens are defenseless). >> Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed >> weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > guns aren't nearly as significant as either the pro- or the anti- > forces believe. Please cite these statistics - the ones I've read show that violent crime has gone down *MUCH* more in states with CCW laws (Florida, Alaska, Texas, Vermont) than they have in places where guns are restricted (California, New York, Illinois). Hugs, CatNipped > Lis > > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > CatNipped Now that you have explained some of the reasons (ie: cause & effect As well as information regarding the the patriot act & voting against your own government) why you feel so strongly about your rights to defend your self against other lawless minded criminals, I find it easier to understand why you feel so strongly about it. The scenario that you presented was a good one for us to appreciate why you do hold arms to protect yourself against being held against your will by another's mercy & even to protect your property & your lives. It also paints a good example as to why the thought of trying to disarm public citizens would be such a problem, the logistics of the situation & the nightmare involved if any political party were to present this as a vote pulling idea to get the general public to support such an idea.... You will appreciate that when we hear the headlines that come over, be they through TV or even the newspapers and the Internet, but never the details- not one of them paints the same picture as you do. All we get to hear are the mind numbing numbers of innocent victims (particularly when there are children killed)...which is why we find it so hard to comprehend the reasoning behind it all.... Obviously we are aware that these things happen the world over, but even more so in the USA in recent years. With no gun culture of our own, it is difficult to appreciate the depth of this problem and strength of feeling behind your civil rights;in fact I would even go so far as to say that I don't even know what this act is about & why it has the government in office pulling their hair out? Is it because the people voted against the government who tried to do something about disarming the general public...? Of course there will always be a certain number of outlaws(Anywhere in the world), who will do anything to get what they want, or to put their point across to the people. An example of in our own back yard would be referring to northern Ireland for instance in our own case. For years & years they assassinated individuals, blew army patrols up, targeting innocent men, women & even children. You have only to look at the last major atrocity that happened when a bomb went off in Omagh..That particular bombing killed 28 people(including unborn set of twins due a week later to one of the women who lost her life... & wounded 220 others as well. It was made all the worse by misleading statements made by the IRA in the form of coded a warning, that there would be a blast (Independent republican army), leading innocent victims and bystanders right next to the blast so that they felt the full effect of that fateful bombing on 8-16-98..We do understand what violence is like and we have had it visit on our own doorstep..... I am glad that you made this post. In doing so, you have educated us in the way of your culture, rather than leaving us to assume what we will on the minimal detail that we are fed by the media in general. It is wrong of any of us to do this, but we do in our ignorance because it is in human nature. I knew when I posted about our mutual ignorance that it might cause a back lash, but I felt it was worth it just to get us to talk about such issues..... One might argue that this is totally OT:, but I don't think so. In understanding comes wisdom. We are forever arguing over the indoor outdoor issue regarding our cats, & sometimes it becomes so overheated that we even fall out over it which is silly. If you sit & think about it, we all do what we feel is the best thing for our cats. It would be wrong to say that one person doesn't really care about their cat/s because they don't do what I think is the best/safest answer for our beloved furry friends.... Each of us does what we feel is the right thing for our cats, going on social factors, relative threat, experience knowing our furrballs personally. We should respect that each slave is doing what they feel is the best thing for their lords & lady's.... I have explained to you all that we used to let all of our cats out when they wished to go out because it is normal to do that over here. I can only speak for myself though. There are others here from the UK who do live in built up areas & find it impossible to allow their faithful friends out like you all feel in the USA. I live in a village where hardly anything ever happens & we have no roads that are of immediate danger to my cats. But since the shooting of Ringo, I have been forced to rethink their safety. Because I already have some indoor/penned cats, it is not such a major thing deciding that it is time to review our security. Instead of not allowing any of them out, I have decided to give all of my cats the same amount of limited freedom. It is what I feel is best for my babes..... I don't have the risk of dogs next door ( but might in the future.. who knows ?!!) The same as the jackass who flew around Virginia.. you face each problem if you"have to"..you can't live on maybes or perhaps...it would be like telling my daughter that she can't go back to university in case it happens over here-again, logistics. If I can cat proof my garden, then all of the cats get a certain amount of freedom to do as they please in the safety of our own land. I have to trust that my immediate neighbors won't use my cats as target practise. Mind you, she is 65 years old & never had a gun in her life, so hopefully that won't be a problem..... It is a battle of conscience that I hope that I have got right. In the meantime, all of my cats will have to put up with reins only outings to the meadow, but with any luck, by the end of the summer, the whole garden will be totally cat proofed & I can allow them a certain amount of freedom. And, I RESPECT what you all feel is best for your cats too:o) S;o) PS: I am now off to read the rest of the posting on this thread which are ready to go bang in my face for bringing the subject up.. Oh well, that is life. we have to agree to disagree on some things- but if we must, lets stick to declawing or something really dreadful..?!!! >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >CatNipped *Applause* Criminals, by their very nature, disregard the laws. Crime *prevention* by use of a firearm goes largely unreported in the mainstream media unless it's an unusual case such as a senior citizen with a walker using a firearm to protect herself. Florida enacted a CCW system that had the hoplophobes of the gun control lobby crying that Florida would turn into a wild-west scene with blood in the streets. To no rational person's surprise that hasn't happened. Nor has it happened in Kennesaw, GA where firearms ownership is mandatory subject to certain exclusions. Vermont and Alaska have a "liberal" CCW system with few restrictions and encumbrances upon law abiding gun owners, and you don't see the same per-capita firearms related crimes as in the firearms prohibitionist's Utopias of urban Washington D.C., NYC, Chicago and L.A. that only grant licensed ownership to high-profile celebrities and those "connected" to the ruling politicians. Signatureannoyed@net.spammers Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl >>> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would >>> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > L.A. that only grant licensed ownership to high-profile celebrities > and those "connected" to the ruling politicians. You beat me to it. I love Florida's new law no more having to back down in your own home, With Florida having the one of the most set criminals gun laws 10-20-life It still is not a deterrent. Just hits morning someone was found shoot due to criminal activity a few towns over. Criminals are criminals they will get the guns some how some way not matter what laws are in place to stop them > >>> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would > >>> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > get the guns some how some way not matter what laws are in place to stop > them RI also has Chapter 11, Section 8, Paragraph 8 which shields residents from prosecution and civil liabilities. Break into my place and you're getting shot. But our CCW law needs to be changed. Right now the sitting Attorney General has complete control over who gets permits and who doesn't. And the currently sitting AG is an anti-gun nut. > On 18 Apr, 15:42, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Hello Bookie, I shall get some photos posted here of our crowd as soon as I am able to. I have only just got this Pc up and running, so It might take me a few more days to find a photo posting site to be able to post them for you. Does anyone have a recommendation as to which service might be the best one to use? All of our feline hobos have very differing characters & I would love to share some photos with you all. Currently , Binky & Charlie are sunning themselves in the orchard, & Petal is on the sofa in the living room where it is nice and cool & Rory is getting some shut eye before his choral recital tonight. I am lucky that I don't have to worry about how loud he is, because our nearest neighbor is over 3 miles away. Mind you, after last night recital, he might need to take a break tonight. (sigh, we can all live in hope..) Rory is very much the cat character you think he is. He is a neuter that arrived at the back door the day after we moved in & doesn't seem to want to leave. I have put a notice at the post office in town, 6 miles away but I don't hold out much hope of finding who his family were. I have asked farming neighbors and not one of them has ever seen him before. I wonder whether he is a road side abandoned cat. so cruel! Photos soon, I promise, K. > > On 18 Apr, 15:42, kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > - Show quoted text - the one I have put my photos up is picasa go to www.picasa.com, (i think that will work) you have to download the stuff fromthe site onto your computer and it then takes all the photos you have on your pc and automatically uploads them. you then have to upload them to a website you can construct and sort them into albums, add captions etc, it is very simple. Well it has to be cos i can use it and I am not very IT savvy looking forward to your photos Bookie > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > some of the interesting posts that you have here. > K. Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed, please do not post here looking for sympathy. > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > - Show quoted text - OUCH!!!! that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from who? who the f.ck wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity). you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the young these days. bookie > OUCH!!!! > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the > young these days. Bookie. My point was, those who keep their cats indoors where they are safe feel that those of you who allow yours to roam are endangering them needlessly--particularly when you post about them getting shot, hit by cars, bitten by another cat, etc. I wasn't aiming this post at Sheelagh. She got my sympathy, but Ringo got more of it. > > OUCH!!!! > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > hit by cars, bitten by another cat, etc. I wasn't aiming this post at > Sheelagh. She got my sympathy, but Ringo got more of it. put your damn soapbox away and get your head out of your a.s one time Nancy! stop hurting people f.ck a goddamn cat! people are more imporant the hell is wrong with you you think she don't regret it? you're like john doe, I lost my cat and because of his black heart he rub it in! I cried my eyes out, and throws salt in them that's why we tarred and feathered his lilly white a.s > > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the > young these days. Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault indicates a higher moral character. But you're overlooking two important things. 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is not what we live day-to-day over here. 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats, fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers, btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas, black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK, at all levels. The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats roam. Lis > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats > roam. But everybody understands when they see a beautiful picture of a whole, healthy orange tabby boy and then they are told he has been shot and has lost an eye. It's upsetting. The risks may not be equal in the UK and the US, but if you really love them, you don't leave them at the mercy of anything walking or rolling around out there. > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > if you really love them, you don't leave them at the mercy of anything > walking or rolling around out there. Your Preaching to the converted here... The only shame was that Ringo paid the price of my error. No one feel worse about that than I do. Before I got the pedigree cats, all of our cats roamed where they pleased & not a single thing ever happened to even one of them..They were happy healthy cats without a days illness in their long levity.... (look @ Jasper, the last of the old school of cats who died last year @ 18 years old for instance) After we got the Pedigree ones, then the trouble really kicked off. People steal them, was the first reason to keep them in, then the breeding forced us to make sure that only we could choose what contact the cats had with other felines & the list goes on & on.... They are definately most worth the trouble we went through, but there are times when I look @ them and I do feel guilty about not allowing them out of my sight when I take them out because it simply goes against the grain here... I see both sides of the argument because I have been through both scenarios. On balance, if I had a real choice, I would let them roam free. But life is such now that I can't. It has been proven to me that it is not necessarily the pedigree's that are at most risk, as we found out when poor old Ringo was shot..So I have to go for the happy medium & make my garden cat proof and thief proof too. It wrankles me that I have to pay to go to these lengths to protect our cats & but then again on balance, the initial cost of compounding our garden has got to be less than those bills that I would receive from the vet for not taking this action. A sad choice, but one that is necessary for my conscience and their welfare S;o) > > > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault > indicates a higher moral character. ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself. > But you're overlooking two important things. > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is > not what we live day-to-day over here. I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it is true. > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats > roam Again, you have the right of this issue. Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural lifestyle. IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very reason... S;o) > > > > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] > USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to > wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself. Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time I've been reading this newsgroup. Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.) > > But you're overlooking two important things. > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural > lifestyle. Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more natural lifestyle.:) It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other larger predators. > IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most > people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very > reason... Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed. Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self- indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them, too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are really different, in the UK and North America. Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each other.:) Lis >> > > > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > >Lis De-lurking myself - too many years ago, our beautiful 16 year old tortoiseshell who was taking an early evening stroll inside our totally fenced-in yard was brutally killed in front of 2 of my then young teenage sons. New neighbors had moved in 3 weeks before & immediately replaced the shared chain link fence with 6 ft high ugly board fence saying they wanted privacy. Until Whiskey's death, we had no idea they had (monster) dogs - 2 Siberian huskies who broke through the wooden fence & grabbed & shook her to death. The boys were screaming, I grabbed a shovel & tried to beat them off unsuccessfully - only when my husband got the new neighbor to come outside & call off his dogs did they release our cat. It was a horrible experience & the jerk yelled at us - "look what your cat made my dogs do!" I forced the jerk in the end to cover all our expenses for our cat's burial & the costs for a new kitten including all veterinary costs for vaccinations, spaying etc. It didn't make up for losing Whiskey, my wild girl who had been my cat long before I had kids & who'd a terrible history before she was rescued in 1970 & came to me. At that time, a co-worker came across a group of kids trying to drown her in an apartment pool, trying to keep her underwater by bashing her with sticks etc, chased off the kids, dragged her out of the water & brought her into work. I'd never had cats, didn't even like them at that point, but the sight of that small hissing, spitting orange black ball of fire just was irresistible. Point of the story - no matter how safe you think you've made things, you can never tell what might happen & you just have to be very vigilant. M. > >> > > > <kittyca...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > > - Show quoted text - yes vigilant , but not paranoid, and not to the point that you make yourself and your kitties prisoners in their own homes. I am not in the same situation as you, and as jessie has no teeth with which to defend herself i am extra vigilant with her and I take her |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message