As he was filmed from behind I would suggest Buz Aldrin. He was later filmed re-emerging to take samples by golfer Aldrin.
Clinton will Thats not true, he's winding you up..... America is changing, slowly. Same sex marriage has recently made huge progress, religious belief is tumbling year by year as the secular movement gains ground. Never did like the place, too entrenched in biblical mumbo jumbo and paranoia combined with a feeling they can't be hurt behind their cosy borders. It all combines into making them the bullies of the world, freedom and democracy my arse...
Please don't go spoiling one of my favourite conspiracy theories, unless of course you are one of the Illuminati...
LOL. I met Buz on a TV commercial. He didn't strike me as having the brains to find his car in a car park never mind fly to the moon and back.
Seriously Flicky he is not winding me up. He hates London and as a bribe to get him to the Embassy his wife has bought him a tour of Lord's. It is becoming a very expensive trip!
Mr Licky to you.....please don't get over familiar. I can't explain that, I've been driving there since 1975 as have my entire industry and i've never had to do that. In fact since the visa waiver i've never been required to go to Grosvenor Sq. Has he had a DUI?
Maybe because he is a new driver to them (he is nearing 60 by the way) he has to accede to these additional checks, whereas if you have been driving over there since 1975 you have a proven track record. I don't think he has had a DUI. You say that the US is improving, well in a questionnaire that he had to complete he was asked if he was a terrorist! In the olden days you used to have to declare if you were a communist. I fail to see how things are improving Mr Licky!
Well, I see the shooting 'live' on TV yesterday have brought this back into the headlines again. Apparently there was also another shooting esterday, but it didn't even make the news!!!!!
This is just what we need, live shootings! So any nutter is the US can now not only wipe out his (or her) range of victims but upload it for all to see and have even more publicity. Itn truly is a wonderful country, yes sirree!!
I am pretty strongly anti gun but if I lived in the US I would carry one. You would just have to. It's like the nuclear argument in microcosm you would just need to be able to take a fruit cake out before he took you. It's MAD, mutually assured destruction taken down to grass roots.
Absolutely! That is just it CT, it is beyond madness and it will never stop. And they preach about the rest of the world being uncivilised!!
The media hardly helps with the sensationalist coverage. Kind of encourages mentally unstable people into extreme action as they have in the back of their mind that they'll be famous/infamous.
Tbh all mainstream media cause more problems than they're worth, especially bloody newspapers. About time these were held to account for the damage they cause
In terms of 'solving' or attempting to reduce gun crime in the US, personally I think there's a lot to be said for addressing inequality. EDIT: I find it so difficult to know how to address it to be honest. Especially when I hear statistics like: "The UK experiences 2,000 violent crimes per 100,000 people, whereas the US experiences only around 450". Where's the root cause? Is there a root cause? Harvard have even said there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, meaning more guns = less crime! Furthermore, countries with stricter gun laws tend to have higher murder rates than those who have more relaxed laws! Overall, I'm not 100% convinced that a clamp-down on gun ownership in the US will be completely beneficial.
Pretty sure stricter controls on licencing would stop mentally unstable people getting hold of automatic weapons & going on rampages with them. Also I don't really think Joe public need to be able to buy heavy assault weaponry. At least if you tried just tightening up licencing it "might" prevent things like the cinema shootings. Just try to restrict heavy automatic weaponry. Thing is no one knows what'd happen so the only realistic way you find out is to change it & see. Banning ownership of handguns in this country after Dunblane may have prevented anything like it again but proving correlation =causation is quite tricky in such cases.
Hmm... you're probably right in that stricter licencing could well reduce 'random' mass-shooting incidents like the cinema one. I also basically agree with you on the automatic weapons. Like you say, surely there's no need for Joe Schmo to own an assault rifle or an Uzi. As for banning handguns in the UK in 1997, violent crime overall increased in the next 10 years by a whopping 77% (1.2 million incidents). Again though, as you say, correlation/causation is difficult to show, and indeed there hasn't been another Dunblane-type incident.
