Agreed. And, of course, the true intent is to stop the threat; that is, the preservation of one’s life.
to the non gun owners! you have the right to not own a firearm enjoy that right its been protected for you by legitimate gun owners for the last 230 years. John
How arrogant!!!
Actually, I’d say that the Russians were the ones who broke Germany’s back on the Eastern front…
Some count Russia as Asia and some Europe and some a bit of both. My statement regarding Europe includes Russia. My mistake was forgetting the Commonwealth countries.Actually, I’d say that the Russians were the ones who broke Germany’s back on the Eastern front…
That is such an American philosophy, there simply isn’t that suing frenzy over here.
It wasn’t quite that simple, the countires in the Triple Entente were severly crushed in WWII, do you really think they wanted war again? They would try every last thing to try and avoid it, including appeasement.
I agree with both of these
But you see, this simple method to follow seems brilliant to you, but to many it would not. I/ or maybe some women for that matter would not be that happy. I would be really nervous, I wouldn’t want to shoot anyway, incase I did kill someone, then my hand could be shaking, thus the gun is nit straight, then I would probably get a really bad shot, if I shot at all. This is the problem, to you, firing a gun would be fine, it wouldn’t bother you, but it would me, I would, really suck at it.
Yes, but drunken thugs who probably have never even attempted to contribute to society are not highly trained professionals
I go to church, so do my relatives in Ireland and Wales. I don’t think guns have that much to do with it, rather democracy.
Don’t underestimate what an attack from the sky could do, the armed people of America were not much use at Pearl Harbour.
Why do you think they have won the Eurovision so many times?
I assume most people faced with a self-defense situation would not be happy. But if it comes down to me or the attacker, I choose my life over his (or hers) and this is supported by the catechism. I expect I would have many unhappy thoughts about having killed someone, but it was ultimately the other person’s choice to create the situation.But you see, this simple method to follow seems brilliant to you, but to many it would not. I/ or maybe some women for that matter would not be that happy. I would be really nervous, I wouldn’t want to shoot anyway, incase I did kill someone, then my hand could be shaking, thus the gun is nit straight, then I would probably get a really bad shot, if I shot at all. This is the problem, to you, firing a gun would be fine, it wouldn’t bother you, but it would me, I would, really suck at it.
Oh so correct, and I am not a fan of it but if someone I loved was dead because the government took away our right of self-protection I would definitely try to make every one of them pay.That is such an American philosophy, there simply isn’t that suing frenzy over here.
The main reason that the early years of the war were such a rout for the Germans is that in terms of weapons and tactics/leadership they were decades ahead of the rest of the world.
You mean the fact the German U-Boat fleet was able to refuel and take on supplies in Ireland?I go to church, so do my relatives in Ireland and Wales. I don’t think guns have that much to do with it, rather democracy.
Don’t underestimate what an attack from the sky could do, the armed people of America were not much use at Pearl Harbour.
Also, Ireland has never seen much war, no one attacks them, or holds a grudge (apart from England, but that is imperialistic monarchies for you). However their contribution in WWII and abit in WWI is not to be over looked.
If the war had lasted only another 6 months we would not have been so lucky. That is how close the Germans were to developing 3 important things:
No, Germany wouldn’t have. The military losses suffered by Germany were too overwhelming. The German High Command was almost crippled by December 1944, and by March-April 1945, Adolph Hitler had lost whatever tenuous grasp on reality he may have ever had to begin with.
the term WE was emphasized to show that it took all the nations.to conquer the German aggression, wasnt meant to mean anything else.
John
Read your history the polish Military at that time was one of the most powerful in the world,
The armed People of Hawaii which at that time was not even a state are credited with over 20 japanese planes shot down by “small arms fire” thats not bad considering the population of civilians in that era and place,I go to church, so do my relatives in Ireland and Wales. I don’t think guns have that much to do with it, rather democracy.
Don’t underestimate what an attack from the sky could do, the armed people of America were not much use at Pearl Harbour.
Also, Ireland has never seen much war, no one attacks them, or holds a grudge (apart from England, but that is imperialistic monarchies for you). However their contribution in WWII and abit in WWI is not to be over looked.
John