snakey1

Because they lock their criminals up rather than letting them out on the street as is the case in the UK. in a country where life actually means life they are liable to have a few people in prison. I like sheriff joe arpaios idea, make prison a real punishment and sentences longer and at first you will have more people in prison but as time goes on your unlikely to get many repeat offenders. I bet the good sheriff doesn't see too many people twice.

but not if your canadian or swiss

seems like the typical actions of the extreme animal rights lot who claim everything and everyone has a right to life unless of course you don't agree with them and then you don't.

If you don't want to compare the UK to Switzerland how about Canada? after all this country was used in comparison against the USA in the film bowling for columbine and guess what, hundreds of thousands of guns in circulation legally and yet a remarkably low firearms and violent crime rate, strange that.

I have lived in birmingham for 36 years now and have seen it change dramatically for the worse over that period of time, armed crime and violence rates have risen and nothing this government has done has improved the situation. I don't think i look at the crime problem through bigoted eyes unless you think considering violent criminals as scum who should be kept locked away from the general public as being bigoted in which case then yes i am. I get fed up with being told by people that we shouldn't defend ourselves against criminals just give them your money,phone etc if you get mugged, let them help themselves to your belongings and destroy your property if you get broken into and they'll live you alone,(its not their fault they have A.D.H.D or they come from a broken home) well f**k that i happen to work hard for my money and i'm not going to give it up to some lazy tosser who thinks it easier to prey on the weak than it is to get a job. violent crime, everything from "happy slapping" to murder is on the increase because the criminals know they can get away with it because most people are to scared to fight back in case they get arrested for assaulting the criminal and even if the criminals do get arrested the sentences given out are a joke. Maybe arming everyone isn't going to solve the problem outright but if you were a criminal like those in say switzerland or some areas of the usa and you thought that breaking into someones property or trying to mug them may end up getting you shot i guarantee you'll think longer and harder about it than if you'll just end up with an asbo or a fine or community service and the statistics bear this out. as i posted earlier burglaries where the victim is still at home UK 53% USA 13% and the fact that violent crime in the states appears to be falling while here its rising. I'll say one more thing i held a firearms certificate for nine years and had i needed to have defended myself or my family using my legally held handguns i would have (although the security aspects of keeping them would have made this very difficult)as i believe in the saying it is better to be judged by 12 than carried in a box by 6.

The laws covering firearms in europe are many and varied from restrictions that are as tight as the uk's to countries like switzerland where firearms are remarkably common(including "assault rifles" ) infact in switzerland almost every household contains a firearm (they have the lowest armed crime rate in europe mysteriously but then again national service is compulsary.) In switzerland they have recently been trying to tighten their firearms laws to fit in with their more restricted neighbours like germany, italy and austria, hoping to lower their already low crime rate(strangely italy germany and austria although having tighter gun controls also have high firearms and violent crime rates, strange again if restricting access to firearms reduces crime.) some other interesting statistics (call them lies if you will) in the year 2000 the uks murder rate was 68% higher than that of switzerland the number of rapes 188% higher and the number of robberies an amazing 493% higher and yet we have probably the strictist firearms laws in europe while the swiss have one of the least restrictive make of these figure what you will. One last thing since my earlier posting at 3.58pm there has been another shooting in birmingham this one fatal and this one approximately 3 miles from where i live, that makes 3 so far that i know of this week all local to me, obviously in my neck of the woods at least gun control seems to be working just fine maybe "we the public" aren't under attack but sometimes it sure feels like it. maybe i should move to tewkesbury it seems to be all rose tinted there.

Thanks for the correction Newt i'll tweak the individual who fed me that incorrect information. anyway it seems obvious to me that all banning handguns has succeeded in doing is destroying what was a popular sport which we had won several olympic gold medals in. and removing the right to defend yourself as this govenment seems to be intent on is resulting in criminals being able to prey on the public witout fear or consequence. Rabbit you think the public are not as under attack as people make out, well that may be the case for tewkesbury but in a major city like birmingham where i live the crime rate is just a touch higher, a friend of mine was mugged 3 times last year (all of which he successfully defended himself against, he's an ex fireman so isn't exactly a small bloke hardly someone you would think of as your average mugging victiim though) and there have been 2 shootings already this week that i have seen reported in the news.

Or quite possibly "KAYAKER GETS EATEN IN NANTUCKET SLEIGH RIDE FIASCO"

for those interested in figures here are some the number of burgalries where the victim is still at home uk 53% usa 13% since 1995 the UK rates of violent crime have exceeded the usa's for all violent crime except murder and rape. in 1981 the us murder rate was 8.7x that of the uks, in 1995 it dropped to 5.7x and by 2002 it was 3.5x that of the uk. does this mean the usa is becoming less violent or the uk more so. In the 2 years after the 1997 act that banned private ownership of handguns the handgun crime rate actually rose by 40%. and finally in the period 1995 - 2003 a period that included the time when handguns were made illegal murder rates rose by 41% in the uk attempted murder by 29% and overall violent crime by 219%. All in all banning handguns has done nothing to increase public safety or reduce firearms crime. Incidently new york is usually held up as an example of what will happen to the uk if we don't have tighter firearms control and yet seldomly mentioned is the fact that it is illegal to own a firearm in the state of new york(although i am willing to be corrected over this, Newt would know better than i i assume)

No problem with abundance of food for a white shark off the UK coast and the distance from la rochelle is negligable when you consider that white sharks tagged in south africa have been recorded off the coast of australia and then later off the south african coast again thats a there and back journey of thousands of miles, so in reality we have most probably already been visited by white sharks however due to their rareity general the chance that they'll be seen is very small,So all in all SDD your chance of being eaten is pretty insignificant. mind you if your scupper pro is yellow you might be increasing it as i've heard the colour yellow is attractive to sharks hence the term "yum yum yellow"

Not strictly true, my friend CFF was accused on one of the threads discussing problems with the prowler elites of being a rep or dealer for OK because he disagreed with what was being said by a couple of members and had stuck up for OK because of the excellent service we had received from them. I personally have no problems with anybody recommending a product or company because they have received a good service(ooh er) or because said product works well but i can understand that some people don't think that suppliers/importers should be plugging their goods on here be it Ok, Malibu or any other manufacturer.personnal recommendations from happy customers or the general sharing of information about products i would think would be fine with most people though.

Banning handguns has done nothing to protect your children, lots of innocents have been killed since the 1996 firearms ammendment and just because drug crime is kept mostly "in house" don't think that it doesn't spill over and effect normal people it does.The UK now has the highest firearms crime rate in europe and yet has possibly the strictist gun controls. Banning firearms does nothing to stop the 1 in 1,000,000 maniacs because they don't need handguns to kill, a car in the right circumstances is a much more effective weapon.You can't even trust the police with firearms as the recent case that made the news of a royal protection officer threatening a member of the public by holding a handgun to his head after a road rage incidence and then being arrested for it goes to show. I know why not remove anything dangerous from the country including knives forks and spoons, keys (a friend of mine once stabbed a mugger with his car keys), rope,cars ,lorries ,water (we've just had a 2 year old drown in a park lake where i live)disarm the army etc ,then your kids will be safe, except hold on what about the things we can't ban like diseases, sh*t better lock the kids in an oxygen tent in the cellar, ahh but then you'll get arrested for child cruelty and abuse. Sorry for the sarcasm but the world is inherently a dangerous place that you cannot legislate against and banning handguns which are like any other tool (without an idiot behind it they're harmless) was a pointless exercise. until you can stop anyone from going crazy you will never stop innocents getting hurt because it is the crazies that are the problem not what they arm themselves with(prince phillip was taken to task when he said after dunblane that thomas hamilton could have done the same by going into a primary school armed with a cricket bat and would people then call for the banning of all cricket equipment, this may seem like a poor comparison but what defence would a bunch of 6 & 7 year olds have against a fully grown man armed with a cricket bat very little i think.) In the case of thomas hamilton the blame was placed entirely on the heads of innocent legitmate firearms holders instead of on the police who despite repeated warnings about hamilton which gave them every opportunity to disarm him chose to sit back and do nothing(for whatever reason) and so in the end more innocents were affected both in the children he killed and the innocents who had their hobbies taken away from them and in quite a few cases their livelyhoods destroyed.

Thanks for the info guys i'll run it through the other guys going and let you know how we get on as things proceed.

I'm planning to do a 2 week camping/kayaking/fishing tour next summer possibly of wales or the scottish isles with a couple of mates and have the obvious problem of keeping the fishfinder/gps and VHF radio batteries charged for the trip.Our current thought is to fit a solar panel (possibly a flexible one) to each of the kayaks to allow for a constant trickle charge to maintain the batteries charge. If anyone has attempted or even just thought about doing this themselves any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

I have had the front zip crewsaver for a couple of months and haven't found any problems with the zip at all, seems to have been a wise purchase as it has kept me dry and warm so far(haven't been cold enough to have to wear the free adult babygrow that came with it yet however things are feeling a bit cooler now so that may change) and is easy enough to get in and out of and doesn't restrict movement at all, as for footwear i wear five-ten canyoneers as these are comfortable to wear in and out of water and have no problem with crossing wet rocks for comfort or grip.

wouldn't lower themselves or just they can't because their fakes

correct over to you

Well i'll guess we'll never really know whether its a scam or not until one of the "psychics" of the world takes up the challenge and passes it.lets face it if these psychics are so confindent of their ability they should be able to prove it under laboratory conditions easily enough and its not just randi offering prize money to encourage them to do so there are several other groups doing the same.they could be all fakes but until a real psychic turns up we'll never know however i've a feeling we may have a very long wait. As for it being good entertainment i don't disagree but trying to push it as a serious study into the paranormal is going a bit far, thats like describing the sunday sport as a serious broadsheet (and remember alot of people read that)

According to randi's website the $1,000,000 is held as immediatly negotiable bonds which are held by Goldman Sachs. how true this is i'm wouldn't like to say but i would have thought that if goldman sachs thought they were being used they wouldn't associate themselves with randi and his organisation.As for being a showman like any other stage medium that is obviously rubbish. yes randi is a showman and was a stage magician but unlike mediums he never claims that he can contact the dead relatives of gullible people for a small fee like mediums do or claimed that he has any psychic powers at all, yes he makes money off the back of his books like any other author but he doesn't con you into buying them by saying that your dead relatives guided by some spirit from ethiopia told him to tell you to.Mediums are lying fraudsters who take money from the gullible and desperate and as an earlier poster said the only real question is whether they're just lying to you or lying to themselves as well.

thats strange as there have already been quite a few people attempt the million dollar challenge and yet nobodys managed to win the million dollars yet.(for anyone interested ex stage magician james randi has offered a prize of $1,000,000 to who ever can provide indisputable proof of paranormal and/or psychic powers under laboratory conditions. the conditions of the test are agreed by both parties before hand.) As for being gulliable and believing james randi. how could anybody be called gullible for saying they agree with someone who promotes scepticism, a sceptic is by definition the opposite of gullible. He may be selling books but i'm not buying them as i'm not interested in learning how confidence tricksters like uri geller and other so-called psychics & mediums do their trickery. It is interesting to note that the apparently well known "psychic" sylvia browne agreed to do the million dollar challenge on larry king live in september 2001 and has yet to actually follow up on that agreement.who knows maybe shes psychic enough to predict that the result will be total failure.

If your daft enough to believe all that paranormal crap then you deserve to get conned! as for those people who do i suggest they do a bit of research into a man called James Randi and his million dollar challenge and then ask themselves why no psychic card reading charlaton has managed to claim that prize.

heres two from another comedy ,well sort of "theres no glowing fingers on these bastards" and also from the same film "I'm a derek and dereks don't run"

that would be monty python and the holy grail i believe, an excellent movie

You have obviously never seen a taser used correctly or indeed some of the pepper sprays(in certain circumstances).A taser used correctly will put a man down instantly even one high on PCP. there have been several cases in the states where criminals high on PCP have been shot several times with a handgun and have continued to threaten or attack the armed officers. When a taser has been used the subject is incapacitated immediately in virtually everycase. You do not have to be close enough to touch someone for a taser to work they have a range of approximately 30 feet and the most modern versions can even work on someone wearing upto type 3 body armour(which will stop a 9mm police round) With hand guns in a practical sense most combat takes place at distances of less than 21 feet and as police are trained to shoot for the central body mass a criminal wearing body armour may not be stopped by being shot plus if the officers shots miss there is a possiblity of innocent civilian casulties from the rounds which didnt hit the target(most handgun bullets will travel well over 500 yards and still be capable of injuring or killing a person)this is something that does not occur using tasers. If a person is close enough to kill you with a knife before you can draw and fire a taser then they are close enough to do the same to you even if your armed with a handgun.

I have to disagree with you on this point Yes it was a political decision falling in an election year and it almost certainly did win the votes of the easily lead ,however it was pushed through as a law on the grounds that it would effectively reduce handgun crime. it did not do this and at the time lord cullen who headed the inquiry into dunblane acknowledged that it wouldn't and recommended that there shouldn't be a ban on handguns yet the government went forth and ignored their own experts advice. As for one accidental death being better than 10 murders thats not the case if your that one accidental shooting. With the technology available today in the non-lethal weapons market there is no reason to arm all police with firearms. Restrict it to a select highly trained few (less than there are now)to be used as a last resort and issue all other officers with non-lethal technology and the best body armour money can buy not cheap run of the mill crap. Ensure that the police are correctly trained in the use of these devices and then allow them to do their job correctly.Then make prison sentences longer and much harsher give the criminal element a reason to stop carrying firearms (a mandatory 15 years in prison for possession of an illegal firearm with no chance of parole including hard labour may be a start).Then bring back discipline into schools, make all the children wear uniforms no trendy gear or street wear and a return of corporal punishment.Also if a celebrity commits a crime the punishment should be twice that of your average joe bloggs because they are in the public eye and should lead by example(plus most of them are rich enough that they shouldn't have to break the law but they do because they think they're above it because of their wealth and fame) Finally the return of 2 years national service for all under the age of 25 including students, and the rich and famous no get out on the grounds of religion and also make it compulsary for anyone wishing to emmigrate to this country(If you are not willing to defend this country then you shouldnt be living in it). These changes would be a lot more effective than arming all police. God i'm beginning to sound like a party political broadcast