![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#191 | |
Very Mad Bird
![]() Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 53
Posts: 9,246
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#192 |
Baaz Draconian
![]() Join Date: June 17, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 38
Posts: 723
|
Yorick, let's just for the moment assume the numbers are correct.
That means that no ONE person could have fired all those shots. Just like in the Kennedy assassination, there must be a conspiracy. Also like in Kennedy, crumbs were to be picked up in the political fallout from the incident. Your country passed extensive gun control regulations into law afterwards. To someone like me, where incidents are played upon and exploited, and in some cases, engineered to get what certain special interests want all the time where I live, the nature of creating a scenario to pound on the pulpit for gun control, by creating the ultimate nightmare scenario revolving around firearms (short of an out-and-out revolution, but that can't be controlled) one has enough to get a group of emotionally-inclined, reactive politicians in the necessary vulnerable state to be convinced. The person doing the convincing doesn't have to be a part of the conspiracy. Top to bottom, it could be two individuals pulling strings, with no help or involvement with anyone. Now, let's assume for a second the numbers are wrong. This means that the facts and figures of the case are in suspect, that the methods of evidence gathering as used by the police are not sound. This also means that the case needs to be re-examined by the authorities, and Bryant's case needs a new day in court, without a 'cop-out Louie' for a lawyer.
__________________
[img]\"http://www.jtdistributing.com/pics/tshirts/experts%20copy.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /> |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#193 | ||
Very Mad Bird
![]() Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 53
Posts: 9,246
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#194 |
Baaz Draconian
![]() Join Date: June 17, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 38
Posts: 723
|
No, Yorick, assuming the numbers are correct, as Timber Loftis said, they're INHUMAN! No human being could achieve that marksmanship. It simply cannot be done! There's no getting around that simple fact. A shots fired per second rate being above 1, with headshots every time is impossible by human standards. It goes beyond the levels of nervature and muscular control.
Didn't my whole argument register with you? Aren't you processing this? If his lawyer was cop-out, a loser, or in on the theorized conspiracy, Bryant wasn't properly represented. Even if he pleads not guilty, in Australia, the worst thing they can do is send him to prison till the day he dies. In his case, that's the best thing he can get as well. Why the hell shouldn't the lawyer fight out as many terms as he can? Don't you get it? The only reason conducive to a lawyer to cop out is a reason to cop out. That won't sit well on the lawyer's record. Considering this particular factual inconsistency, at least showing a glaring hole in the prosecution's case against Bryant alone would be a simple matter. They couldn't possibly get any jury in the world to believe that Bryant, a legally handicapped man, was in fact a superman. Now, the only way one can justify that fact, is that the numbers are wrong. You have to ASSUME the only numbers we have, are false. You'd be turning into good 'ol Ron Reagan with his infamous 'facts are stupid things' quote. The facts of a case determine someone's innocence or guilt, not conjecture, or the fact that someone pleads guilty. That doesn't prove a thing. As I argued before, Bryant's anti-social tendancies would make it very easy to throw the argument right over his head, plead guilty, shuttle him off to prison, and make him yesterday's news, with NO EFFORT from a conspiracy. You see something completely normal in a man not even getting an actual trial. You assume a man declared legally handicapped and thusly entitled to payments from the government to help pay his living expenses is going to understand what his lawyer is saying, and know full well that he is being shuttled off to prison. Any rational man, who would be 'speaking through his lawyer' at least, rational at the time of trial, would plead not guilty, and fight it out in court. The defendant has nothing to lose in this case, so why not? The ROF numbers aren't just any numbers, those are the same kind of numbers that proved a conspiracy in an assassination attempt in 1963, for which only one man ever went to court. Too many shots, too little time for one man. A second or even third man is absolutely necessary for this case. You'd be asking me to swallow something fundamentally unbelievable, compared to something that actually could happen.
__________________
[img]\"http://www.jtdistributing.com/pics/tshirts/experts%20copy.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /> |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#195 |
Lord Ao
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: June 24, 2002
Location: Nevernever Land
Age: 51
Posts: 2,002
|
OK I don't know the numbers involved in this particular case (could someone point me to some facts?). But I want to dispell any illusions those fearful of firearms have about how "easy" it is to kill with a firearm. When firing a weapon, you have two choices in how you fire .... speed or accuracy. Lots and LOTS of training can bring the difference between them together, but you will never achieve high rate of fire with pin point accuracy. The human eye can not focus that quickly.
I consistantly qualify Sharpshooter or Expert with an AR-15 by US Army standards and Expert with a 9 mm (90% + ![]() Obviously I point out my personal skills with a firearm because I am well trained and highly skilled. The average person will perform nowhere near this. Even in the Army the largest popualtion of shooters is Marksman .... 55 - 69%. [ 04-08-2004, 09:22 PM: Message edited by: Night Stalker ]
__________________
[url]\"http://www.duryea.org/pinky/gurkin.wav\" target=\"_blank\">AYPWIP?</a> .... <img border=\"0\" alt=\"[1ponder]\" title=\"\" src=\"graemlins/1ponder.gif\" /> <br />\"I think so Brain, but isn\'t a cucumber that small called a gherkin?\"<br /> ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#196 |
Very Mad Bird
![]() Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 53
Posts: 9,246
|
The point seemingly missed by you Oblivion, is that none of this, even if things are as you say, (which I have repeatedly disagreed with) prove a conspiracy, because you are yet to provide a motive.
I repeat, gun laws are a means to an end. You have given no reason why this would have occured. You mention social change.... what social change? I didn't feel any dictatorship. Most Australians didn't own guns anyway. It prevented nutcases like Bryant getting them, practicing until they hit remarkable accuracy levels, and going on killing sprees. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#197 | |
Very Mad Bird
![]() Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 53
Posts: 9,246
|
Quote:
Or the numbers are wrong. Something still not out of the question. A conspiracy is still the most unlikely scenario of the three. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#198 |
Lord Ao
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: June 24, 2002
Location: Nevernever Land
Age: 51
Posts: 2,002
|
Actually, a weapon's savant is the more unlikely of the three Yorick. Idiot savants are exceedingly rare. Prodigies are rare enough.
I'm not saying it's impossible, as I said, I don't know the facts of the case (though I am intrigued).
__________________
[url]\"http://www.duryea.org/pinky/gurkin.wav\" target=\"_blank\">AYPWIP?</a> .... <img border=\"0\" alt=\"[1ponder]\" title=\"\" src=\"graemlins/1ponder.gif\" /> <br />\"I think so Brain, but isn\'t a cucumber that small called a gherkin?\"<br /> ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#199 |
Baaz Draconian
![]() Join Date: June 17, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 38
Posts: 723
|
Yorick, we're assuming individuals who would go out and murder other people would be rational enough to know and understand how little impact the firearm has in Australian society.
Yorick, an idiot savant of this sort can not happen! We're talking about the physical limits of the nervous and muscular system, limits that can't be gotten around, merely adapted to. You can't compensate for them in this case, what he is said to have done is for all intents and purposes, impossible. These aren't as you put it, 'remarkable' accuracy levels. This was IMPOSSIBLE! A motive is irrelevant if we can provide inarguable fact (as we have) that at least two people were present. By definition there was a conspiracy. Even if they were just two more Martin Bryants, the case deserves a second look on that fact alone, as the man in prison, convicted without a trial, did not do it, or was part of something larger than what is assumed by the public. What were the major changes in Australian politics following the incident? Now, do the numbers show an improved safety record for citizens of urban areas after gun control was enacted? No they don't. They show people becoming less safe. Criminals do exist in Australia. Don't assume 'it can't happen here' a lot of stuff happens like that, and has a tendancy to spiral out of control.
__________________
[img]\"http://www.jtdistributing.com/pics/tshirts/experts%20copy.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /> |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#200 |
Very Mad Bird
![]() Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 53
Posts: 9,246
|
What is possible by humans is always changing Oblivion. the four minute mile was impossible! Human muscular and nervous systems!
He had nothing else to do. He didn't even surf, despite owning surfboards, and strapping them to the top of his car. He had benefits, was taken care of financially, and owned guns. As I said, there are many autistic people who've developed piano playing ability - mechanical, control over muscles, speed and intent success - despite being impaired in others. As I said, he could rive a car. He had a license. A car is more complex, involves more parts of the body, and split second decisions. He was not totally retarded. I'm not sure what you are picturing, but it wasn't a person not in control of their actions. He was deemed legally responsible, not sent to a mental home for example. The media love to drum up his mental state. Especially the gun lobby, but it simply wanst the case. Bear in mind we have power hungry politicians who created parties to remove gun laws. The Shooters Part is one. Australia First, was another, The right wing racist Pauline Hanson, ended up joining forces with the gun movement at one stage. Radical minority parties seeking radical social change. The motive for that section is quite clear, and it would appear you have been duped by the dubious information put forward by these people. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Death penalty for Akbar | Morgeruat | General Discussion | 5 | 11-21-2006 11:35 PM |
US Death Penalty Statistics | Timber Loftis | General Discussion | 8 | 09-11-2003 01:52 PM |
death penalty...who can help | Drake | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 5 | 10-24-2001 03:34 AM |
Death penalty yes or no? | Tuor | General Discussion | 22 | 10-03-2001 01:33 PM |
Penalty for death? | pugnex | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 1 | 09-10-2001 12:49 AM |