Vindicated

Dave!

esel wrote:

Read first page and this page. Didn't read links.

Based on my limited information, I hereby state that it is my ill-considered opinion that needle_tool is indeed in need of a solitary hobby.

I hear clapping is pretty fun......

Give it a try OP! Just like this:


Your hands get tired after a while, but that's the challenging part

lemansky

DaveMcG wrote:

I hear clapping is pretty fun......

Give it a try OP! Just like this:


Your hands get tired after a while, but that's the challenging part

Excellent:D

But wait aren't hands lethal weapons dave?To use them in an activity as careless and haphazard as clapping would surely be exactly what the OP is trying to tell us not to do?

Spitfire666

i love how he only partialy quotes people. i mention gardai showing an intrest in a good way and he twisted it and made it look like a negative thing. and the stupid coment about pointing one at a garda,

Heres a thought that isn't in anyway new,
Why dont we ban all sports as things like baseball bats, hocky sticks, hurls, golf clubs, and even the humble swing ball racket can be usied in a manner that could be illegal.
If somebody pointed an airsoft gun at a garda it would be seized and them possibly arrested/brought home to there parents/cautioned, depending on the circumstances, just as they would if they held a hammer over their head and made like they were going to swing it, oh s**te, now we need to ban DIY.

its as simple as this, hammers are not illegal, if you do something illegal with it, thats were its a problem, the hammer is still not illegal but its evidence as it was used in the commission of a crime.

THE EXACT SAME FACTS APPLY TO EVERYTHING, AIRSOFT INCLUDED.

Gordon

lemansky wrote:

But wait aren't hands lethal weapons dave?To use them in an activity as careless and haphazard as clapping would surely be exactly what the OP is trying to tell us not to do?

One person clapping in Ireland can very well cause a tornado over the pacific ocean. But that's a rather thunderous version of the clap.

Vegeta

Gordon wrote:

One person clapping in Ireland can very well cause a tornado over the pacific ocean. But that's a rather thunderous version of the clap.

classic

o1s1n

Spitfire666 wrote:

i love how he only partialy quotes people. i mention gardai showing an intrest in a good way and he twisted it and made it look like a negative thing.

I noticed that myself.

It's a sure sign of losing an argument if you have to start omitting sections of peoples posts to twist what they said.

CrazyRabbit

Needles, I'm bored. Please come back and post more in this thread.

Can we move this to the humor forum?

the_syco

needle_too wrote:

Which is the problem that needs to be addressed.

If I used a hammer in a crime, it'd be classified as a weapon.

needle_too wrote:

What would you do Spitfire if someone pointed one at you? (i'm not ribbing, I'm asking seriously, put your uniform on and think like youre on the job - forget your personal opinion.) What would you do?

If someone threatened me with a hammer, I'd kick his ass.

needle_too wrote:

In their absense some responsible people need to take the reins.

Oh, let me guess, you want some poweh over teh hammers?

Victor

Fysh wrote:

Also, going back to the Examiner article needle_too was using as the basis of his post; if the Revenue Commissioner in question is quoting the Firearms Act of 1990 and there is a more recent revision/enactment of law (from what I understand of this thread, the Criminal Justice Act of 2006), I'd be more worried about a Revenue Commissioner quoting legal acts which have been superseded than whether some twit of a troll understands that he is not only hopelessly and utterly wrong, but also quite possibly a gift horse and convenient source of revenue to his solicitor. "What's that? You say you want to sue the sun for illuminating you on a daily basis without your consent? Why, of course I can provide you with legal counsel...."

The 1990 act would have been the relevant act until the 2006 act was implemented.

Sparks

The 2006 act only replaces part of the 1990 act though, so you could still cite the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990 in some cases. (And since the 2007 Criminal Justice Act amends the firearms acts yet again, you technically shouldn't be citing the 2006 Act but "the Firearms Act, as amended"...)

Spitfire666

Sparks wrote:

The 2006 act only replaces part of the 1990 act though, so you could still cite the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990 in some cases. (And since the 2007 Criminal Justice Act amends the firearms acts yet again, you technically shouldn't be citing the 2006 Act but "the Firearms Act, as amended"...)

Exactly right, thats how law gets quoted in court or it gets thrown out.