From: Neil Francis, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One thing I would point out again is that the most common
reason I get given for unsubscribing is the volume of email
messages.
There are also the (web) archives - may as well publicize these as well.
I have to say - for what is sent out - 20 to
From: "matthew.wright7", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am I right in thinking they have two members. Even if the Govt get away with
adding an arms-length anti into the committee, despite the unrepresentative
nature of GCN, how do they justify two?
Matthew
--
No, they have six!
Steve.
Actually if you want to have a real laugh go and have a look at
this:
http://www.gun-control-network.org/CrimStats0101.htm
Apparently having the highest handgun-related homicide figure ever
is "statistically insignificant"!
So if it in fact does not "save one life" they attempt to
From: "Mike Burns", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.gun-control-network.org
Have a read:
--
Thank you for your interest in the Gun Control Network.
This Website will outline our aims, which are simple, and
the ways you can help, which are many.
The job of this network is not to
From: Pete Ansbro, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
In fairness to the police I don't think you can criticise their response
in this incident. He did threaten to shoot the kids.
Yes, with a brush apparently.
And taking this text as accurate, these really sound like the sort of
kids who go
From: Norman Bassett, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guy Savage is quite right, not enough people are doing
anything constructive.
We all seem to have agreed after past discussion that
ONE shooting organisation would be beneficial and the
others are superfluous, divisive and damaging.
I give it
From: andrew, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To find out what the FBI "carnivor" internet sniffer is and does read
this and related links.
http://www.securityfocus.com/templates/article.html?id=127
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey Steve - or indeed anybody - Can someone please explain to me just how you
can shoot someone with a hand BRUSH for Gods' sake ? Surely any "threat" which
is patently impossible to carry out is no real threat at all, and like the
police actions here should simply
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The fact is that he didn't have a gun, he was armed with a brush, for God's
sake. In such circumstances just how reasonable is it for the poor guy to be
prosecuted for making a rhetorical threat to shoot some irritating teenagers?
What if he'd said, "Go away and
From: Jeremy Peter Howells, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Even more incredible is that (as reported in the press) :-
1. 'Several people saw him walking down the road with a sawn-off shotgun'
2. Police raid the house about an hour and a half later - firearms teams,
loudhailers, etc.
3. He and
From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'll raise your finger with my chicken... :-(Stupidity
running rampant. Mike Pietrantoni
Boy Suspended for Pointing Chicken
.c The Associated Press
JONESBORO, Ark. (AP) - An 8-year-old boy was suspended
from school for 3 days
after
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, they have six!
Steve.
Have they actually published a complete membership
list? Surely this is a reasonable request given that they
are on a government advisory comittee?
Jonathan Laws
--
I think it's on their website.
Anyway, there's Gill
From: "Alex Hamilton", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm still intrigued as to how they could define it without also
banning lots of other things - which would be outside the scope
of an order under Section 1(4). Going by the draft guidance
the Home Office is concocting they still have yet to
13 matches
Mail list logo
