PDA

View Full Version : Another Lurker introduction.


April 18th 07, 03:42 PM
Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
simply to sing.

We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
some of the interesting posts that you have here.
K.

sheelagh
April 18th 07, 04:32 PM
On 18 Apr, 15:42, wrote:
> Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> simply to sing.
>
> We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> K.

Hi Kitty, great to see you around again.
Draw a chair up and join the cat slave society.
I am looking forward to hearing all about your cats in due course
too....
S;o)

Lynne
April 18th 07, 06:41 PM
on Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:42:14 GMT, wrote:

> I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> some of the interesting posts that you have here.

Welcome to the group, and bless you for all the work you do, caring for
stray and abandoned cats.

--
Lynne

bookie
April 18th 07, 08:54 PM
On 18 Apr, 15:42, wrote:
> Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> simply to sing.
>
> We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> K.

i want lots of photos of all these kitty pusses, lots and lots of
them, particularly this fellow called rory cos he sounds like a real
rascal.

which CP group do you help with?

bookie

cybercat
April 18th 07, 10:49 PM
> wrote in message
ps.com...
> Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> simply to sing.
>
> We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> K.
>

Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
please do not post here looking for sympathy.

bookie
April 19th 07, 01:01 AM
On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ps.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > simply to sing.
>
> > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > K.
>
> Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OUCH!!!!

that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).

you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
young these days.

bookie

cybercat
April 19th 07, 01:08 AM
"bookie" > wrote
> OUCH!!!!
>
> that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> young these days.
>

Bookie. My point was, those who keep their cats indoors where they
are safe feel that those of you who allow yours to roam are endangering
them needlessly--particularly when you post about them getting shot,
hit by cars, bitten by another cat, etc. I wasn't aiming this post at
Sheelagh. She got my sympathy, but Ringo got more of it.

thug gangsta bookie fan
April 19th 07, 08:40 AM
On Apr 18, 8:08 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
> "bookie" > wrote
>
>
>
> > OUCH!!!!
>
> > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > young these days.
>
> Bookie. My point was, those who keep their cats indoors where they
> are safe feel that those of you who allow yours to roam are endangering
> them needlessly--particularly when you post about them getting shot,
> hit by cars, bitten by another cat, etc. I wasn't aiming this post at
> Sheelagh. She got my sympathy, but Ringo got more of it.

put your damn soapbox away and get your head out of your ass one time
Nancy!
stop hurting people

**** a goddamn cat! people are more imporant

the hell is wrong with you

you think she don't regret it?

you're like john doe, I lost my cat and because of his black heart he
rub it in!

I cried my eyes out, and throws salt in them

that's why we tarred and feathered his lilly white ass

Lesley via CatKB.com
April 19th 07, 10:54 AM
wrote:
>Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
>now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
>name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats

Hi

Also in the UK myself I am the slave of the Fabulous Furballs aka Redunzel
and Sarrasine, 4 year old black sisters. Redunzel was a hippy in a previous
existence, she spends a lot of time apparently meditating but Sarrasine is
the punk kitten!

--
Message posted via CatKB.com
http://www.catkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/cat-health/200704/1

Lis
April 19th 07, 04:06 PM
On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > wrote in message
>
> ps.com...
>
> > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > simply to sing.
>
> > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > K.
>
> > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> OUCH!!!!
>
> that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> young these days.

Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
indicates a higher moral character.

But you're overlooking two important things.

1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
not what we live day-to-day over here.

2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
at all levels.

The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
roam.

Lis

sheelagh
April 19th 07, 04:18 PM
On 18 Apr, 20:54, bookie > wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 15:42, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > simply to sing.
>
> > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > K.
>
> i want lots of photos of all these kitty pusses, lots and lots of
> them, particularly this fellow called rory cos he sounds like a real
> rascal.
>
> which CP group do you help with?
>
> bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That's ok Bookie, but thanks all the same.
Actually, I have been waiting for weeks for Nanacy to say something
about old Ringo. Her silence spoke volumes. I know how she
feels.,Anyhow, how can any self respecting American possibly
understand that we don't have cyoties, rattle snakes, bears, & not all
of us live in the middle of cities with cars and jugernaut's & roads
that our cats have to cross just for the sheer hell of it? They Can't
know, so they don't understand....Simple!!

Actually, I live in a sleepy village ,where the most news worthy event
is who won the veg growing competeition this year...other than Ringo
and his poor friend's being blasted by the children from hell of
course! It is "not Normal" to keep your cat indoors over here. When I
tell other villagers that I keep my cats indoors, they give me queer
looks & you can read their faces saying, "what the hell do you do that
for"? I'm fed up with explainig that it is because I am frightened for
them, because the stares get even stranger... It is much easier to
tell them it is because I have pedigree cats. They seem to understand
that one a bit more & just give a nodding comiseration instead.
As you say, Ringo didn't understand what confinment meant before
coming here, so it is totally alien to him, & somtimes he hates me for
it ... The nonchalent waging tail flick gives it away you see...

I have come to the conclusion that it would be wicked of me to take
away his liberty. He has a right to it, but I also have a duty of care
to him, so I have decided to come to a compramise. I am having our
garden surounded with anti cat mesh so that all of our cats can have a
bit of liberty rather than the chosen few. It seems the best solution
I believe. In the meantime, Both Ringo & I have come to an agreement.
He is allowed out, but only whilst someone is out there with him. When
we come in, so does Ringo. This is at least until I can come up with
the funds needed to do the entire garden. I did think about canceling
xmas, but the kids didn't think that was a very good idea, so I will
have to come up with some other ideas,...

(possiblly renting out Paul as an escoert perhaps?) Hmm, now there is
a thought.....LOL

<rubbing my hands with glee @ the very thought of it all>
Back to Americans, & what they don't understand I believe...Now, you
must talk about us in the same way that we talk about you too. I think
we call it a difference in culture, rather than a difference in
opinion. For instance, over in USA, you have had a dreadful tragedy
regarding a gun toting freak roaring through a university in
Virginia?
( with my own daughter @ uni, I shudder @ the very thought)....

Well I can't tell you the sorrow that we feel for those kids that were
taken so needlesly, or the teachers either, not to mention what their
families are going through.. it is harrowing & it is dreadul for them
all. But this is not the first time it has happened over there, is it?
It has happened several times, & we Brits find it incredible that you
haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
about taking your rifel to the grocers, but she has a better knack of
being sarcastic than I do...

Please don't mistake what I say as a comparison, because it simply
isn't one @ all!! We abhor the loss of life inflicted, point blank!!
My point was, that we don't understand one anothers culture, so we
shouldn't knock it until we know better than to. I am telling you that
we are ignorant to your ways, & the same is relative to you all in the
USA too.Bookie jokes about us both & our ways as well, but she does
carry the truth in her words all the same. Our younger genration carry
knives because of the consequences of being caght with a gun..We have
a very healthy fear of them here.
When Ringo was shot, all be it with a BB Gun.. it was a very news
worthy event!!!
Yes, kids do have them. But most of the kids that own one, have a
father or some mentor that would over see what they do when using one.
Of course we have inadequate parenting, hence what happened to Ringo.

Ringo was really did get a raw deal that day. It isn't every day that
we have gun toting teenagers shooting cats willy nilly over here @
all. When you consider that he had no chosen home for several months
before we let him in, you will see that it was the fact that he was in
the wrong place @ the wrong time. It could have happened to any cat, &
did for several others too. I wasn't seeking sympathy here when I
posted at all. If anything, I think I felt outraged by it & I was
telling others to be aware that this can happen to their cat.

However Cyber, I take your point & I can assure you that if this ever
happened again to ANY of my cats, whilst they were in the sanctuary of
our garden, I would rip the head off the idiot who was stupid enough
to threaten my cats liberty, small as that might be...
S;o)

cybercat
April 19th 07, 06:24 PM
"Lis" > wrote
> The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> roam.
>

But everybody understands when they see a beautiful picture of a
whole, healthy orange tabby boy and then they are told he has
been shot and has lost an eye.

It's upsetting. The risks may not be equal in the UK and the US, but
if you really love them, you don't leave them at the mercy of anything
walking or rolling around out there.

sheelagh
April 19th 07, 06:51 PM
On 19 Apr, 18:24, "cybercat" > wrote:
> "Lis" > wrote
>
> > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > roam.
>
> But everybody understands when they see a beautiful picture of a
> whole, healthy orange tabby boy and then they are told he has
> been shot and has lost an eye.
>
> It's upsetting. The risks may not be equal in the UK and the US, but
> if you really love them, you don't leave them at the mercy of anything
> walking or rolling around out there.

Your Preaching to the converted here...
The only shame was that Ringo paid the price of my error. No one feel
worse about that than I do.

Before I got the pedigree cats, all of our cats roamed where they
pleased & not a single thing ever happened to even one of them..They
were happy healthy cats without a days illness in their long
levity....
(look @ Jasper, the last of the old school of cats who died last year
@ 18 years old for instance)

After we got the Pedigree ones, then the trouble really kicked off.
People steal them, was the first reason to keep them in, then the
breeding forced us to make sure that only we could choose what contact
the cats had with other felines & the list goes on & on.... They are
definately most worth the trouble we went through, but there are times
when I look @ them and I do feel guilty about not allowing them out of
my sight when I take them out because it simply goes against the grain
here...

I see both sides of the argument because I have been through both
scenarios. On balance, if I had a real choice, I would let them roam
free. But life is such now that I can't. It has been proven to me that
it is not necessarily the pedigree's that are at most risk, as we
found out when poor old Ringo was shot..So I have to go for the happy
medium & make my garden cat proof and thief proof too.

It wrankles me that I have to pay to go to these lengths to protect
our cats & but then again on balance, the initial cost of compounding
our garden has got to be less than those bills that I would receive
from the vet for not taking this action. A sad choice, but one that is
necessary for my conscience and their welfare
S;o)

sheelagh
April 19th 07, 07:13 PM
On 19 Apr, 16:06, Lis > wrote:
> On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> > > > wrote in message
>
> > ps.com...
>
> > > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > > simply to sing.
>
> > > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > > K.
>
> > > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > OUCH!!!!
>
> > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > young these days.
>
> Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> indicates a higher moral character.
>
> But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
> than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
> fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
> btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
> variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
> while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
> black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
> the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
> there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
> really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
> moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
> at all levels.
>
> The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> roam.
>
> Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

> Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> indicates a higher moral character.

ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be
honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to
say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the
USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
> But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> not what we live day-to-day over here.

I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the
basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always
carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on
that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the
laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it
is true.

> The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> roam

Again, you have the right of this issue.

Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell
other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either
indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant
expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people
that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is
only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this
for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
lifestyle.

IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do
their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to
tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat
flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
reason...
S;o)

Lis
April 19th 07, 09:14 PM
On Apr 19, 2:13 pm, sheelagh > wrote:
> On 19 Apr, 16:06, Lis > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> > > > > wrote in message
>
> > > ps.com...
>
> > > > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > > > simply to sing.
>
> > > > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > > > K.
>
> > > > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > > > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > > > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > > > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > OUCH!!!!
>
> > > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > > young these days.
>
> > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
> > than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
> > fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
> > btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
> > variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
> > while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
> > black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
> > the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
> > there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
> > really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
> > moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
> > at all levels.
>
> > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > roam.
>
> > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
> > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be
> honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to
> say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the
> USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.

Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
I've been reading this newsgroup.

Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)

> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the
> basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always
> carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on
> that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the
> laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it
> is true.
>
> > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > roam
>
> Again, you have the right of this issue.
>
> Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell
> other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either
> indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant
> expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people
> that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is
> only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this
> for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> lifestyle.

Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
natural lifestyle.:)

It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
larger predators.

> IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do
> their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to
> tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat
> flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> reason...

Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
really different, in the UK and North America.

Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
other.:)

Lis

mariib via CatKB.com
April 19th 07, 11:26 PM
Lis wrote:
>> > > > > wrote in message
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 84 lines]
>> USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
>> wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
>Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
>and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
>predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
>cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
>traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
>we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
>I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
>Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
>you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
>possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
>get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
>are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
>people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
>> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>> for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
>> lifestyle.
>
>Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
>natural lifestyle.:)
>
>It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
>places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
>other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
>from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
>mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
>being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
>larger predators.
>
>> IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
>> people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
>[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>> flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
>> reason...
>
>Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
>injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
>trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
>companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
>Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
>these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
>indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
>take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
>happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
>sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
>rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
>break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
>too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
>the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
>for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
>really different, in the UK and North America.
>
>Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
>other.:)
>
>Lis
De-lurking myself - too many years ago, our beautiful 16 year old
tortoiseshell who was taking an early evening stroll inside our totally
fenced-in yard was brutally killed in front of 2 of my then young teenage
sons. New neighbors had moved in 3 weeks before & immediately replaced the
shared chain link fence with 6 ft high ugly board fence saying they wanted
privacy. Until Whiskey's death, we had no idea they had (monster) dogs - 2
Siberian huskies who broke through the wooden fence & grabbed & shook her to
death. The boys were screaming, I grabbed a shovel & tried to beat them off
unsuccessfully - only when my husband got the new neighbor to come outside &
call off his dogs did they release our cat. It was a horrible experience &
the jerk yelled at us - "look what your cat made my dogs do!" I forced the
jerk in the end to cover all our expenses for our cat's burial & the costs
for a new kitten including all veterinary costs for vaccinations, spaying etc.
It didn't make up for losing Whiskey, my wild girl who had been my cat long
before I had kids & who'd a terrible history before she was rescued in 1970 &
came to me. At that time, a co-worker came across a group of kids trying to
drown her in an apartment pool, trying to keep her underwater by bashing her
with sticks etc, chased off the kids, dragged her out of the water & brought
her into work. I'd never had cats, didn't even like them at that point, but
the sight of that small hissing, spitting orange black ball of fire just was
irresistible. Point of the story - no matter how safe you think you've made
things, you can never tell what might happen & you just have to be very
vigilant.
M.

--
Message posted via http://www.catkb.com

bookie
April 20th 07, 03:28 AM
On 19 Apr, 21:14, Lis > wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2:13 pm, sheelagh > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 19 Apr, 16:06, Lis > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > > On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > wrote in message
>
> > > > ps.com...
>
> > > > > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > > > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > > > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > > > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > > > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > > > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > > > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > > > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > > > > simply to sing.
>
> > > > > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > > > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > > > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > > > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > > > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > > > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > > > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > > > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > > > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > > > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > > > > K.
>
> > > > > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > > > > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > > > > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > > > > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > OUCH!!!!
>
> > > > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > > > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > > > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > > > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > > > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > > > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > > > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > > > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > > > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > > > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > > > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > > > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > > > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > > > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > > > young these days.
>
> > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > > 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
> > > than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
> > > fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
> > > btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
> > > variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
> > > while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
> > > black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
> > > the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
> > > there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
> > > really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
> > > moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
> > > at all levels.
>
> > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > roam.
>
> > > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
> > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be
> > honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to
> > say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the
> > USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> > wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
>
>
>
>
> > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the
> > basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always
> > carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on
> > that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the
> > laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it
> > is true.
>
> > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > roam
>
> > Again, you have the right of this issue.
>
> > Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell
> > other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either
> > indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant
> > expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people
> > that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is
> > only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this
> > for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> > lifestyle.
>
> Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> natural lifestyle.:)
>
> It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> larger predators.
>
> > IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> > people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> > there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do
> > their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to
> > tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat
> > flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> > reason...
>
> Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> other.:)
>
> Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

for christs sake, people actually take my pseudo-prejudices seriously?
i ahve a number of american friends and aquaintances and i am not
stupid enough to think that you are all gun toting, white hood
wearing, inbred bigots well not all of you anyway), credit me with
some bloody intelligence

what people in the states seem to forget is that we do not have the
same gun culture here as inthe US of A, we are not allowed to own guns
in the way that you lots are, my father owns a few guns (small bore
rifles, full bore, pistols) for sport (he shoots at paper targets, not
small furry critters btw) and the paperwork and aggro he has to deal
with to be allowed a firearms licence inthis country is mindblowing
(police come and check the house, he has to have a psychiatric
assessment etc etc). We do not have gun stores here and there is just
not any encouragement for people to go out and arm themselves, it is
not part of our culture or our nature as a country, we do not feel we
have to 'defend' ourselves against some group of marauding attackers
inthe way that americans seem to think is going to happen to them (you
must think this as you have it in your constitution that you are
entitled to have a gun in every house to defend yourselves, but
against what i must ask?).

If bands of wild savages landed on our shores inthe middle of the
night our line of defence would be to write a stern letter to the
Times about it, and maybe another one to our MP (Member of
Parliament), but I suspect that most of us have enough faith in her
majesties armed forces and such like to defend our little island, we
have long since moved out of the dark ages and the times of vikings
landing every other week to rape, burn and pillage so the individual
does not need to have his or her own private arsenal in their shed
(thats guns by the way).

the shooting of ringo was really out of the ordinary, kids do not
normally go around shooting guns over here, it is just not done, it is
not generally considered 'cool' by the youth of today (believe me, i
know , i work with a lot of them, the vast majority would never
consider such a thing, just too uncool for them).

the other thing is we DO NOT have wild animals roaming our urban
streets, we do not have wolves, etc wandering around in huge packs
waiting to tear to pieces any domestic creature who gets in their way.
In fact the most destructive creatures in our urban and suburban areas
are usually cats, little miss tiddles out catching birds and squirrels
and the like. Our cats do not have those kinds of predators to worry
about over here in Blighty, in fact our cats tend to be right at the
top of the food chain in 99.9% of places and have nothing to worry
about and neither do their owners.

as sheelagh said before, owners who keep their cats confined to
barracks permanantly are considered freaks and nutters inthis country
because we generally consider that there are no real dangers to our
pets inthe outside world. In the main we are a nation of animal lovers
who treat our pets better than our children and we consider them as
part fo the family or friends. we also tend tothink that animals are
supposed to live outside primarily and i knwo a number of people whose
dogs live permanantly outside (yes they have kennels and shelters etc)
as these are working dogs. I knwo some people who will leave their
cats outside all day whilst they are at work because they have no cat
flap fitted and they think that to confine the cat to the indoors
woudl be cruel to the cat. They bring the cat in when they return from
work, keep it in at night of course, leave food out inthe day for it,
but they would not dream of making tiddles give up his daily
birdwatching activities in the back garden and I can understand that.
personally i keep my cats when i am out and as they are old and
geriatric they just sleep the day away anyway. when I am around inthe
morning, evening, and at weekends i leave the back door open and they
can come and go as they please and I would not want to restrict them
access to our small but perfectly formed garden (and next doors garden
too via a gap under the back fence they don't know about), where I am
and for the distance they roam there is no need.

I do not agree with you chaps inthe states keeping your cats in but
then I have had to say to myself, "maybe the situation there is
different to here and maybe they are doing it because there are many
more dangers there than in the UK, so shut up and let them get on with
it, they must have good reason". I cannot think of any point where i
have openly slated the USA tendency to keep cats indoors, although i
am sure someone will find somethign I have said, because i do not
know what your situations are in the areas you live, what predators
you have etc which you need to protect your cats from. Simliarly you
probably do not realise that we in the UK do not have the same worries
at all and we have a very different situation here so slating someone
here for doing what is considered normal in this country just shows
your ignorance and lack of understanding and tolerance for other
cultures, not mine.

bookie

bookie
April 20th 07, 03:37 AM
On 19 Apr, 23:26, "mariib via CatKB.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lis wrote:
> >> > > > > wrote in message
>
> >[quoted text clipped - 84 lines]
> >> USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> >> wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> >Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> >and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> >predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> >cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> >traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> >we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> >I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> >Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> >you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> >possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> >get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> >are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> >people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
> >> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> >[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> >> for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> >> lifestyle.
>
> >Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> >natural lifestyle.:)
>
> >It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> >places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> >other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> >from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> >mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> >being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> >larger predators.
>
> >> IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> >> people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> >[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> >> flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> >> reason...
>
> >Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> >injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> >trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> >companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> >Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> >these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> >indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> >take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> >happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> >sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> >rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> >break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> >too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> >the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> >for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> >really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> >Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> >other.:)
>
> >Lis
>
> De-lurking myself - too many years ago, our beautiful 16 year old
> tortoiseshell who was taking an early evening stroll inside our totally
> fenced-in yard was brutally killed in front of 2 of my then young teenage
> sons. New neighbors had moved in 3 weeks before & immediately replaced the
> shared chain link fence with 6 ft high ugly board fence saying they wanted
> privacy. Until Whiskey's death, we had no idea they had (monster) dogs - 2
> Siberian huskies who broke through the wooden fence & grabbed & shook her to
> death. The boys were screaming, I grabbed a shovel & tried to beat them off
> unsuccessfully - only when my husband got the new neighbor to come outside &
> call off his dogs did they release our cat. It was a horrible experience &
> the jerk yelled at us - "look what your cat made my dogs do!" I forced the
> jerk in the end to cover all our expenses for our cat's burial & the costs
> for a new kitten including all veterinary costs for vaccinations, spaying etc.
> It didn't make up for losing Whiskey, my wild girl who had been my cat long
> before I had kids & who'd a terrible history before she was rescued in 1970 &
> came to me. At that time, a co-worker came across a group of kids trying to
> drown her in an apartment pool, trying to keep her underwater by bashing her
> with sticks etc, chased off the kids, dragged her out of the water & brought
> her into work. I'd never had cats, didn't even like them at that point, but
> the sight of that small hissing, spitting orange black ball of fire just was
> irresistible. Point of the story - no matter how safe you think you've made
> things, you can never tell what might happen & you just have to be very
> vigilant.
> M.
>
> --
> Message posted viahttp://www.catkb.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

yes vigilant , but not paranoid, and not to the point that you make
yourself and your kitties prisoners in their own homes.
I am not in the same situation as you, and as jessie has no teeth with
which to defend herself i am extra vigilant with her and I take her
for walks with me around the cul de sac at the front of our house and
the green across the road so i can she where she is and that she is
safe. She would nto go that far without me anyway and as soon as i
turn to head back to the house she instantly follows (obviously i DO
NOT have her on a lead or anything daft like that, I just accompany
her), she knows that with me she is safe out the front of the house
without me she wont; be so she doesn't go out unless i am with her.

as for the back of our house, due to the large number of cats around
who have all marked out their territories, she only goes into our
garden and the neighbours to our right as they are 'hers'. The big fat
white and tabby tom cat has the neighbours garden to our left and all
those further up the road, and a black and white fluffy chap seems to
control those backing on to our garden, so those are out of bounds. As
for Kitty she doesn;t go further than the patio, so no worries there.

yes terrible things can happen but dontl use it as a reason to keep
your cat a prisoner if your circumstances are very different

bookie

Lis
April 20th 07, 12:29 PM
On Apr 19, 10:28 pm, bookie > wrote:
> On 19 Apr, 21:14, Lis > wrote:
>
> > On Apr 19, 2:13 pm, sheelagh > wrote:
>
> > > On 19 Apr, 16:06, Lis > wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > wrote in message
>
> > > > > ps.com...
>
> > > > > > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > > > > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > > > > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > > > > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > > > > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > > > > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > > > > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > > > > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > > > > > simply to sing.
>
> > > > > > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > > > > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > > > > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > > > > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > > > > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > > > > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > > > > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > > > > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > > > > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > > > > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > > > > > K.
>
> > > > > > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > > > > > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > > > > > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > > > > > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > OUCH!!!!
>
> > > > > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > > > > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > > > > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > > > > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > > > > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > > > > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > > > > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > > > > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > > > > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > > > > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > > > > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > > > > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > > > > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > > > > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > > > > young these days.
>
> > > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > > > 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
> > > > than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
> > > > fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
> > > > btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
> > > > variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
> > > > while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
> > > > black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
> > > > the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
> > > > there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
> > > > really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
> > > > moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
> > > > at all levels.
>
> > > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > > roam.
>
> > > > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > > ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be
> > > honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to
> > > say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the
> > > USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> > > wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> > Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> > and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> > predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> > cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> > traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> > we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> > I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> > Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> > you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> > possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> > get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> > are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> > people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
> > > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > > I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the
> > > basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always
> > > carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on
> > > that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the
> > > laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it
> > > is true.
>
> > > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > > roam
>
> > > Again, you have the right of this issue.
>
> > > Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell
> > > other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either
> > > indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant
> > > expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people
> > > that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is
> > > only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this
> > > for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> > > lifestyle.
>
> > Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> > natural lifestyle.:)
>
> > It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> > places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> > other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> > from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> > mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> > being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> > larger predators.
>
> > > IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> > > people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> > > there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do
> > > their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to
> > > tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat
> > > flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> > > reason...
>
> > Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> > injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> > trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> > companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> > Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> > these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> > indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> > take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> > happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> > sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> > rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> > break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> > too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> > the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> > for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> > really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> > Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> > other.:)
>
> > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> for christs sake, people actually take my pseudo-prejudices seriously?
> i ahve a number of american friends and aquaintances and i am not
> stupid enough to think that you are all gun toting, white hood
> wearing, inbred bigots well not all of you anyway), credit me with
> some bloody intelligence

Bookie, I don't know you in Real Life. I can only judge by your words
here. This wasn't your first anti-American rant since I've been
reading this newsgroup, and, well, look at the rest of your reply.

> what people in the states seem to forget is that we do not have the
> same gun culture here as inthe US of A, we are not allowed to own guns
> in the way that you lots are, my father owns a few guns (small bore
> rifles, full bore, pistols) for sport (he shoots at paper targets, not
> small furry critters btw) and the paperwork and aggro he has to deal
> with to be allowed a firearms licence inthis country is mindblowing
> (police come and check the house, he has to have a psychiatric
> assessment etc etc). We do not have gun stores here and there is just
> not any encouragement for people to go out and arm themselves, it is
> not part of our culture or our nature as a country, we do not feel we
> have to 'defend' ourselves against some group of marauding attackers
> inthe way that americans seem to think is going to happen to them (you
> must think this as you have it in your constitution that you are
> entitled to have a gun in every house to defend yourselves, but
> against what i must ask?).

There's a wide range of reasons for having guns--personal self-
defence, enjoyment of target shooting,sport hunting, controlling local
vermin, hunting for the pot. Self-defense against dangerous wildlife--
wild or feral hogs are a serious problem in some places.

TV and movies are not real life.

> If bands of wild savages landed on our shores inthe middle of the
> night our line of defence would be to write a stern letter to the
> Times about it, and maybe another one to our MP (Member of
> Parliament), but I suspect that most of us have enough faith in her
> majesties armed forces and such like to defend our little island, we
> have long since moved out of the dark ages and the times of vikings
> landing every other week to rape, burn and pillage so the individual
> does not need to have his or her own private arsenal in their shed
> (thats guns by the way).

Large swatches of the US have a comparatively recent history (second
half of the nineteenth century) of the white settlers having been
there before any significant government presence. The cavalry coming
over the hill in the nick of time is such a common dramatic trope in
Westerns (both books and movies) precisely because the settlers
couldn't count on it happening. It's got nothing to do with real life
today, but it's a huge difference between our recent history and most
of Europe, which is a thousand years (and in some places more) removed
from new settlers colonizing the wilderness.
>
> the shooting of ringo was really out of the ordinary, kids do not
> normally go around shooting guns over here, it is just not done, it is
> not generally considered 'cool' by the youth of today (believe me, i
> know , i work with a lot of them, the vast majority would never
> consider such a thing, just too uncool for them).

News flash: It wouldn't be considered normal here, either; even in
parts of the US where gun ownership is common (and yes, it does vary a
lot by region), kids that age would not normally have unsupervised
access to guns. Oh, BB guns are slightly more common, in the right
areas, but shooting the neighbors' cats for the fun of it is
sociopathic behavior anywhere.

> the other thing is we DO NOT have wild animals roaming our urban
> streets, we do not have wolves, etc wandering around in huge packs
> waiting to tear to pieces any domestic creature who gets in their way.
> In fact the most destructive creatures in our urban and suburban areas
> are usually cats, little miss tiddles out catching birds and squirrels
> and the like. Our cats do not have those kinds of predators to worry
> about over here in Blighty, in fact our cats tend to be right at the
> top of the food chain in 99.9% of places and have nothing to worry
> about and neither do their owners.

Um, yeah, I said that, and I said it's why Americans and Brits think
differently about letting their cats roam. We each do what seems
outrageous to the other, because our circumstances are different.

> as sheelagh said before, owners who keep their cats confined to
> barracks permanantly are considered freaks and nutters inthis country
> because we generally consider that there are no real dangers to our
> pets inthe outside world. In the main we are a nation of animal lovers
> who treat our pets better than our children and we consider them as
> part fo the family or friends. we also tend tothink that animals are
> supposed to live outside primarily and i knwo a number of people whose
> dogs live permanantly outside (yes they have kennels and shelters etc)
> as these are working dogs. I knwo some people who will leave their
> cats outside all day whilst they are at work because they have no cat
> flap fitted and they think that to confine the cat to the indoors
> woudl be cruel to the cat. They bring the cat in when they return from
> work, keep it in at night of course, leave food out inthe day for it,
> but they would not dream of making tiddles give up his daily
> birdwatching activities in the back garden and I can understand that.
> personally i keep my cats when i am out and as they are old and
> geriatric they just sleep the day away anyway. when I am around inthe
> morning, evening, and at weekends i leave the back door open and they
> can come and go as they please and I would not want to restrict them
> access to our small but perfectly formed garden (and next doors garden
> too via a gap under the back fence they don't know about), where I am
> and for the distance they roam there is no need.
>
> I do not agree with you chaps inthe states keeping your cats in but
> then I have had to say to myself, "maybe the situation there is
> different to here and maybe they are doing it because there are many
> more dangers there than in the UK, so shut up and let them get on with
> it, they must have good reason". I cannot think of any point where i
> have openly slated the USA tendency to keep cats indoors, although i
> am sure someone will find somethign I have said, because i do not
> know what your situations are in the areas you live, what predators
> you have etc which you need to protect your cats from. Simliarly you
> probably do not realise that we in the UK do not have the same worries
> at all and we have a very different situation here so slating someone
> here for doing what is considered normal in this country just shows
> your ignorance and lack of understanding and tolerance for other
> cultures, not mine.

Um, Bookie, I did in fact talk about that in the post you seem to have
read only the first paragraph or so of--you let your cats out because
your cats face many fewer risks outside than ours do. If I'm not
mistaken, the largest predator you have left is the fox--or do you
have badgers as well? At any rate, yes, domestic cats are at or near
the top of the food chain throughout the British Isles. In North
America, we have lots of critters quite able and willing to kill and
eat our cats. And because of the differences in when our cities and
towns were built (centuries of difference!), we also tend, on average,
to live much closer to much faster-moving traffic, making that a
greater risk as well. As for the crazies, the punks, the budding young
sociopaths--we each have our share, but for us they're the icing on
the cake of outdoor risks to pets, while for you it's close to the
only one. And by itself, it's not enough to cause most people to
confine the kitties indoors. It's too low-probability a risk.

But for us, it's different. And cats that are raised as indoor cats,
if you give some thought and attention to what they need (places to
climb, places to hide, some degree of interactivity in their
environment so that they can satisfy their hunting instinct and their
social needs), are very happy indoors. I've even had shelter rescues
who HAD survived on their own as ferals, who were grateful not to have
go outside again. Heck, my older cat now is a feral rescue, who is
frightened by NOTHING except a door open to the outside. She does not
want EVER to go out again. That's because life outside is different
here for cats, than it is in the UK.

Lis

April 20th 07, 02:00 PM
On 18 Apr, 18:41, Lynne > wrote:
> on Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:42:14 GMT, wrote:
>
> > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
>
> Welcome to the group, and bless you for all the work you do, caring for
> stray and abandoned cats.
>
> --
> Lynne

Thank you Lynne. I see it more as a duty to them than a chore, I
assure you. They are such good company & so badly treated at times.

My, I had no idea that introductions could be so volatile. It most
certainly wasn't my intention. I find it it nice to see that sometimes
that sometimes even though you don't agree with one another, you can
at least leave the animosity with the issue, rather than let it fester
within the group. I think I am going to enjoy myself here far more
than I initially thought.

Thank you to all of you & I look forward to getting to know you all
individually. I see we have many interesting characters here.
K.

April 20th 07, 02:32 PM
On 18 Apr, 20:54, bookie > wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 15:42, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > simply to sing.
>
> > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > K.
>
> i want lots of photos of all these kitty pusses, lots and lots of
> them, particularly this fellow called rory cos he sounds like a real
> rascal.
>
> which CP group do you help with?
>
> bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hello Bookie,
I shall get some photos posted here of our crowd as soon as I am able
to. I have only just got this Pc up and running, so It might take me a
few more days to find a photo posting site to be able to post them for
you. Does anyone have a recommendation as to which service might be
the best one to use?
All of our feline hobos have very differing characters & I would love
to share some photos with you all.

Currently , Binky & Charlie are sunning themselves in the orchard, &
Petal is on the sofa in the living room where it is nice and cool &
Rory is getting some shut eye before his choral recital tonight. I am
lucky that I don't have to worry about how loud he is, because our
nearest neighbor is over 3 miles away. Mind you, after last night
recital, he might need to take a break tonight. (sigh, we can all live
in hope..)

Rory is very much the cat character you think he is. He is a neuter
that arrived at the back door the day after we moved in & doesn't seem
to want to leave. I have put a notice at the post office in town, 6
miles away but I don't hold out much hope of finding who his family
were. I have asked farming neighbors and not one of them has ever seen
him before. I wonder whether he is a road side abandoned cat. so
cruel!
Photos soon, I promise,
K.

April 20th 07, 02:45 PM
On 20 Apr, 12:29, Lis > wrote:
> On Apr 19, 10:28 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
> > On 19 Apr, 21:14, Lis > wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 19, 2:13 pm, sheelagh > wrote:
>
> > > > On 19 Apr, 16:06, Lis > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Apr 18, 8:01 pm, bookie > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On 18 Apr, 22:49, "cybercat" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > wrote in message
>
> > > > > > ps.com...
>
> > > > > > > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > > > > > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > > > > > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > > > > > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > > > > > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > > > > > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > > > > > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > > > > > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > > > > > > simply to sing.
>
> > > > > > > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > > > > > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > > > > > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > > > > > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > > > > > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > > > > > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > > > > > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > > > > > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > > > > > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > > > > > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > > > > > > K.
>
> > > > > > > Welcome, Kitty! I love getting more UK posters in. We do fine except for
> > > > > > > when the indoor/outdoor debate comes up. What would be very helpful: if
> > > > > > > you allow your cat to roam and it gets shot by a bb gun or otherwise harmed,
> > > > > > > please do not post here looking for sympathy.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > OUCH!!!!
>
> > > > > > that was somewhat unnecessary! sheelagh yuou can have all the sympathy
> > > > > > you want from me, as ringo was an outdoor cat anyway it would have
> > > > > > been donwright cruel to confine him to the indoors for the rest of his
> > > > > > days just in case there were any gun toting little scrotes roaming
> > > > > > your area who had probably got the idea to shoot at innocent creatures
> > > > > > from watching too many american films where every argument is sorted
> > > > > > out with a drive-by shooting and every redneck and yankee thinks its
> > > > > > his god given right to own and use a gun to 'protect' himself (from
> > > > > > who? who the **** wants to go to the US of A anyway? it is an awful
> > > > > > place full of hideous americans. Oh yes I forget he has to protect
> > > > > > himself from all the other paranoid freaks around him who also have
> > > > > > guns under their beds and use them at every available opportunity).
>
> > > > > > you seem to forget that gun crime is nowhere near as prevalent in our
> > > > > > fine country than in america, stabbing is far more popular with the
> > > > > > young these days.
>
> > > > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > > > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > > > > 2. There are one or two more differences between the US and the UK
> > > > > than just gun laws. Among those differences are coyotes, bobcats,
> > > > > fishers, mountain lions, hawks, eagles, wolves, and bears. Fishers,
> > > > > btw, are not people with fishing poles; they're an especially nasty
> > > > > variety of weasel, and a serious threat to cats and small dogs. And
> > > > > while some of this predatory wildlife stays in "wild" or rural areas,
> > > > > black bears are a problem in many outer suburbs, coyotes are found in
> > > > > the inner 'burbs and cities, and some raptors nest in cities. And then
> > > > > there's that mundane thing, traffic: American homes _tend_, for a
> > > > > really broad generalization, to be closer to the roads, and to traffic
> > > > > moving at higher speeds, than in roughly-equivalent housing in the UK,
> > > > > at all levels.
>
> > > > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > > > roam.
>
> > > > > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > > > Well, clearly stabbing as the preferred form of murderous assault
> > > > > indicates a higher moral character.
>
> > > > ROFLOL...I don't think that was what Bookie actually meant to be
> > > > honest Lis, but I do take your point. I think that she was trying to
> > > > say that we don't have the same predatory issues that you have in the
> > > > USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> > > > wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> > > Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> > > and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> > > predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> > > cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> > > traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> > > we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> > > I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> > > Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> > > you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> > > possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> > > get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> > > are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> > > people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
> > > > > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > > > > 1. TV and movies are Not. Real. Life. What you see on the screen is
> > > > > not what we live day-to-day over here.
>
> > > > I agree with you here. I was making my point generalised upon the
> > > > basis of the news that we watch here. Both Brit & Sky news are always
> > > > carrying stories about yet another mass shooting in the USA. Based on
> > > > that, we do find it hard to understand why nothing is done about the
> > > > laws governing them. I suppose you could call us Ignorant..because it
> > > > is true.
>
> > > > > The result is that Brits don't understand why Americans keep their
> > > > > cats indoors, and Americans don't understand why Brits let their cats
> > > > > roam
>
> > > > Again, you have the right of this issue.
>
> > > > Hardly anyone over here confines their cat indoors, so when you tell
> > > > other neighbors and friends ect, that you keep all of your cats either
> > > > indoors or outside in pens, they simply look at you with a vacant
> > > > expression..to them it is incomprehensible. In fact the only people
> > > > that might understand are fellow pedigree owners & breeders, & that is
> > > > only out of nessecity. Given the choice, none of us would choose this
> > > > for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> > > > lifestyle.
>
> > > Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> > > natural lifestyle.:)
>
> > > It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> > > places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> > > other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> > > from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> > > mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> > > being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> > > larger predators.
>
> > > > IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> > > > people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> > > > there is no need to have an indoor cat litter, when they can go and do
> > > > their business out side where they prefer to & we don't have to
> > > > tolerate, pay for & clear up after. Because most people have a cat
> > > > flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> > > > reason...
>
> > > Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> > > injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> > > trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> > > companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> > > Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> > > these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> > > indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> > > take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> > > happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> > > sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> > > rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> > > break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> > > too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> > > the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> > > for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> > > really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> > > Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> > > other.:)
>
> > > Lis- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > for christs sake, people actually take my pseudo-prejudices seriously?
> > i ahve a number of american friends and aquaintances and i am not
> > stupid enough to think that you are all gun toting, white hood
> > wearing, inbred bigots well not all of you anyway), credit me with
> > some bloody intelligence
>
> Bookie, I don't know you in Real Life. I can only judge by your words
> here. This wasn't your first anti-American rant since I've been
> reading this newsgroup, and, well, look at the rest of your reply.
>
> > what people in the states seem to forget is that we do not have the
> > same gun culture here as inthe US of A, we are not allowed to own guns
> > in the way that you lots are, my father owns a few guns (small bore
> > rifles, full bore, pistols) for sport (he shoots at paper targets, not
> > small furry critters btw) and the paperwork and aggro he has to deal
> > with to be allowed a firearms licence inthis country is mindblowing
> > (police come and check the house, he has to have a psychiatric
> > assessment etc etc). We do not have gun stores here and there is just
> > not any encouragement for people to go out and arm themselves, it is
> > not part of our culture or our nature as a country, we do not feel we
> > have to 'defend' ourselves against some group of marauding attackers
> > inthe way that americans seem to think is going to happen to them (you
> > must think this as you have it in your constitution that you are
> > entitled to have a gun in every house to defend yourselves, but
> > against what i must ask?).
>
> There's a wide range of reasons for having guns--personal self-
> defence, enjoyment of target shooting,sport hunting, controlling local
> vermin, hunting for the pot. Self-defense against dangerous wildlife--
> wild or feral hogs are a serious problem in some places.
>
> TV and movies are not real life.
>
> > If bands of wild savages landed on our shores inthe middle of the
> > night our line of defence would be to write a stern letter to the
> > Times about it, and maybe another one to our MP (Member of
> > Parliament), but I suspect that most of us have enough faith in her
> > majesties armed forces and such like to defend our little island, we
> > have long since moved out of the dark ages and the times of vikings
> > landing every other week to rape, burn and pillage so the individual
> > does not need to have his or her own private arsenal in their shed
> > (thats guns by the way).
>
> Large swatches of the US have a comparatively recent history (second
> half of the nineteenth century) of the white settlers having been
> there before any significant government presence. The cavalry coming
> over the hill in the nick of time is such a common dramatic trope in
> Westerns (both books and movies) precisely because the settlers
> couldn't count on it happening. It's got nothing to do with real life
> today, but it's a huge difference between our recent history and most
> of Europe, which is a thousand years (and in some places more) removed
> from new settlers colonizing the wilderness.
>
>
>
> > the shooting of ringo was really out of the ordinary, kids do not
> > normally go around shooting guns over here, it is just not done, it is
> > not generally considered 'cool' by the youth of today (believe me, i
> > know , i work with a lot of them, the vast majority would never
> > consider such a thing, just too uncool for them).
>
> News flash: It wouldn't be considered normal here, either; even in
> parts of the US where gun ownership is common (and yes, it does vary a
> lot by region), kids that age would not normally have unsupervised
> access to guns. Oh, BB guns are slightly more common, in the right
> areas, but shooting the neighbors' cats for the fun of it is
> sociopathic behavior anywhere.
>
> > the other thing is we DO NOT have wild animals roaming our urban
> > streets, we do not have wolves, etc wandering around in huge packs
> > waiting to tear to pieces any domestic creature who gets in their way.
> > In fact the most destructive creatures in our urban and suburban areas
> > are usually cats, little miss tiddles out catching birds and squirrels
> > and the like. Our cats do not have those kinds of predators to worry
> > about over here in Blighty, in fact our cats tend to be right at the
> > top of the food chain in 99.9% of places and have nothing to worry
> > about and neither do their owners.
>
> Um, yeah, I said that, and I said it's why Americans and Brits think
> differently about letting their cats roam. We each do what seems
> outrageous to the other, because our circumstances are different.
>
> > as sheelagh said before, owners who keep their cats confined to
> > barracks permanantly are considered freaks and nutters inthis country
> > because we generally consider that there are no real dangers to our
> > pets inthe outside world. In the main we are a nation of animal lovers
> > who treat our pets better than our children and we consider them as
> > part fo the family or friends. we also tend tothink that animals are
> > supposed to live outside primarily and i knwo a number of people whose
> > dogs live permanantly outside (yes they have kennels and shelters etc)
> > as these are working dogs. I knwo some people who will leave their
> > cats outside all day whilst they are at work because they have no cat
> > flap fitted and they think that to confine the cat to the indoors
> > woudl be cruel to the cat. They bring the cat in when they return from
> > work, keep it in at night of course, leave food out inthe day for it,
> > but they would not dream of making tiddles give up his daily
> > birdwatching activities in the back garden and I can understand that.
> > personally i keep my cats when i am out and as they are old and
> > geriatric they just sleep the day away anyway. when I am around inthe
> > morning, evening, and at weekends i leave the back door open and they
> > can come and go as they please and I would not want to restrict them
> > access to our small but perfectly formed garden (and next doors garden
> > too via a gap under the back fence they don't know about), where I am
> > and for the distance they roam there is no need.
>
> > I do not agree with you chaps inthe states keeping your cats in but
> > then I have had to say to myself, "maybe the situation there is
> > different to here and maybe they are doing it because there are many
> > more dangers there than in the UK, so shut up and let them get on with
> > it, they must have good reason". I cannot think of any point where i
> > have openly slated the USA tendency to keep cats indoors, although i
> > am sure someone will find somethign I have said, because i do not
> > know what your situations are in the areas you live, what predators
> > you have etc which you need to protect your cats from. Simliarly you
> > probably do not realise that we in the UK do not have the same worries
> > at all and we have a very different situation here so slating someone
> > here for doing what is considered normal in this country just shows
> > your ignorance and lack of understanding and tolerance for other
> > cultures, not mine.
>
> Um, Bookie, I did in fact talk about that in the post you seem to have
> read only the first paragraph or so of--you let your cats out because
> your cats face many fewer risks outside than ours do. If I'm not
> mistaken, the largest predator you have left is the fox--or do you
> have badgers as well? At any rate, yes, domestic cats are at or near
> the top of the food chain throughout the British Isles. In North
> America, we have lots of critters quite able and willing to kill and
> eat our cats. And because of the differences in when our cities and
> towns were built (centuries of difference!), we also tend, on average,
> to live much closer to much faster-moving traffic, making that a
> greater risk as well. As for the crazies, the punks, the budding young
> sociopaths--we each have our share, but for us they're the icing on
> the cake of outdoor risks to pets, while for you it's close to the
> only one. And by itself, it's not enough to cause most people to
> confine the kitties indoors. It's too low-probability a risk.
>
> But for us, it's different. And cats that are raised as indoor cats,
> if you give some thought and attention to what they need (places to
> climb, places to hide, some degree of interactivity in their
> environment so that they can satisfy their hunting instinct and their
> social needs), are very happy indoors. I've even had shelter rescues
> who HAD survived on their own as ferals, who were grateful not to have
> go outside again. Heck, my older cat now is a feral rescue, who is
> frightened by NOTHING except a door open to the outside. She does not
> want EVER to go out again. That's because life outside is different
> here for cats, than it is in the UK.
>
> Lis

And to this all I can add is thank you for agreeing to respect the
others culture & reasons for allowing or not allowing your cats to be
either inside or outside cats. It is a very personal option, & one
that we should respect if the other is happy that they have done the
right thing.

Before you ask, all of mine have different status. Our rescue cats are
confined to pens and have the run of the house as well as an enclosed
coutyard, where I have planted some cat mint and grass to help with
the furr balls. My own cats are getting on in years and we live in a
fairly remote issolated spot, far away from roads & they are far too
lazy to wonder too far from their radiator beds and food bowls. I do
allow mine to go out, but they are very rarely far from home or the
near constantly open back door.
the best thing that can be said for this issue, is

Amen!

K

April 20th 07, 03:25 PM
On 19 Apr, 23:26, "mariib via CatKB.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Lis wrote:
> >> > > > > wrote in message
>
> >[quoted text clipped - 84 lines]
> >> USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> >> wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> >Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> >and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> >predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> >cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> >traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> >we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> >I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> >Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> >you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> >possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> >get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> >are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> >people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
> >> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> >[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> >> for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> >> lifestyle.
>
> >Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> >natural lifestyle.:)
>
> >It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> >places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> >other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> >from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> >mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> >being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> >larger predators.
>
> >> IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> >> people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> >[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> >> flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> >> reason...
>
> >Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> >injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> >trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> >companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> >Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> >these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> >indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> >take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> >happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> >sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> >rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> >break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> >too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> >the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> >for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> >really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> >Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> >other.:)
>
> >Lis
>
> De-lurking myself - too many years ago, our beautiful 16 year old
> tortoiseshell who was taking an early evening stroll inside our totally
> fenced-in yard was brutally killed in front of 2 of my then young teenage
> sons. New neighbors had moved in 3 weeks before & immediately replaced the
> shared chain link fence with 6 ft high ugly board fence saying they wanted
> privacy. Until Whiskey's death, we had no idea they had (monster) dogs - 2
> Siberian huskies who broke through the wooden fence & grabbed & shook her to
> death. The boys were screaming, I grabbed a shovel & tried to beat them off
> unsuccessfully - only when my husband got the new neighbor to come outside &
> call off his dogs did they release our cat. It was a horrible experience &
> the jerk yelled at us - "look what your cat made my dogs do!" I forced the
> jerk in the end to cover all our expenses for our cat's burial & the costs
> for a new kitten including all veterinary costs for vaccinations, spaying etc.
> It didn't make up for losing Whiskey, my wild girl who had been my cat long
> before I had kids & who'd a terrible history before she was rescued in 1970 &
> came to me. At that time, a co-worker came across a group of kids trying to
> drown her in an apartment pool, trying to keep her underwater by bashing her
> with sticks etc, chased off the kids, dragged her out of the water & brought
> her into work. I'd never had cats, didn't even like them at that point, but
> the sight of that small hissing, spitting orange black ball of fire just was
> irresistible. Point of the story - no matter how safe you think you've made
> things, you can never tell what might happen & you just have to be very
> vigilant.
> M.
>
> --
> Message posted viahttp://www.catkb.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm so pleased to meet you.

I was devastated by your tragic story & horrified that the chap next
door to you blamed you for what was clearly his dogs intrusion.

I very much hope that your story has moved a few people to think about
their arrangements too. Whilst I allow our cats out, it is only ever
whilst I am at home & under supervision.

I would say that our most dangerous predator has got to be the common
fox. Thankfully we have never had to suffer anything like this, but it
has certainly made me think about it. There are badgers, but since
moving here, we have tried to survey the land around us & thus yet
have never managed to locate a set anywhere within a 3 mile radius.
We have fortunately never been bothered by foxes either, but that
doesn't mean to say that a vixen might not choose to cub near us, so
we must stay vigilant all of the time. It is quite sad really, because
I love the common fox & would hate to have to chase one away. I think
I would probably end up leaving food out for her so that she could
feed her cubs & bring our fat-cat family indoors until the danger had
passed.
K.

bookie
April 20th 07, 04:57 PM
On 20 Apr, 14:32, wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 20:54, bookie > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 18 Apr, 15:42, wrote:
>
> > > Hi, I having been lurking on the edge of this group for a few weeks
> > > now too, so thought it might be time to introduce myself as well.. My
> > > name is Kitty, short for Katherine, & I live in the UK & I have 4 cats
> > > to keep me company day & night because I work from home. Their names
> > > are Binky Birman, Charlie Chocolate drop, Petal the tabby cat & our
> > > resident visiting cat whom I have named Rory..(he tends to roar at
> > > night!). I might as well call him our cat, because he spends most of
> > > his time here lolling all over the sofa all day, & goes out at night
> > > simply to sing.
>
> > > We live in an old Cottage that I am renovating presently &when we have
> > > finished this one, I intend to build our own home, with some new
> > > housing outside because I do a lot of work for the Cat Protection
> > > League. I also take in a lot of rescue cats. At this time of year, we
> > > are just starting to become snowed under with pregnant Queens that
> > > have been dumped. In fact we received our second one last night, so I
> > > am currently trying to co ordinate which of our carers might be able
> > > to take her in until such time as she has her kittens & can be spayed.
> > > I look forward to popping by now and again to see who is around and
> > > some of the interesting posts that you have here.
> > > K.
>
> > i want lots of photos of all these kitty pusses, lots and lots of
> > them, particularly this fellow called rory cos he sounds like a real
> > rascal.
>
> > which CP group do you help with?
>
> > bookie- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hello Bookie,
> I shall get some photos posted here of our crowd as soon as I am able
> to. I have only just got this Pc up and running, so It might take me a
> few more days to find a photo posting site to be able to post them for
> you. Does anyone have a recommendation as to which service might be
> the best one to use?
> All of our feline hobos have very differing characters & I would love
> to share some photos with you all.
>
> Currently , Binky & Charlie are sunning themselves in the orchard, &
> Petal is on the sofa in the living room where it is nice and cool &
> Rory is getting some shut eye before his choral recital tonight. I am
> lucky that I don't have to worry about how loud he is, because our
> nearest neighbor is over 3 miles away. Mind you, after last night
> recital, he might need to take a break tonight. (sigh, we can all live
> in hope..)
>
> Rory is very much the cat character you think he is. He is a neuter
> that arrived at the back door the day after we moved in & doesn't seem
> to want to leave. I have put a notice at the post office in town, 6
> miles away but I don't hold out much hope of finding who his family
> were. I have asked farming neighbors and not one of them has ever seen
> him before. I wonder whether he is a road side abandoned cat. so
> cruel!
> Photos soon, I promise,
> K.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

the one I have put my photos up is picasa go to www.picasa.com, (i
think that will work) you have to download the stuff fromthe site onto
your computer and it then takes all the photos you have on your pc and
automatically uploads them. you then have to upload them to a website
you can construct and sort them into albums, add captions etc, it is
very simple. Well it has to be cos i can use it and I am not very IT
savvy

looking forward to your photos
Bookie

bookie
April 20th 07, 05:05 PM
On 20 Apr, 15:25, wrote:
> On 19 Apr, 23:26, "mariib via CatKB.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Lis wrote:
> > >> > > > > wrote in message
>
> > >[quoted text clipped - 84 lines]
> > >> USA. But she has a wonderful knack of being sarcastic when it come to
> > >> wit. I think her point was that which you have made yourself.
>
> > >Um. Sheelagh, Bookie went on at some length about how awful America
> > >and Americans are, and said not one word about either natural
> > >predators, or the fact that, becuase of the differences in WHEN our
> > >cities and towns were built/underwent most of their growth, vehicular
> > >traffic is simply a bigger issue. What she said was ALL ABOUT how vile
> > >we are--and it's not the first time, even in the relatively short time
> > >I've been reading this newsgroup.
>
> > >Since otherwise she seems to be a completely reasonable person, and
> > >you seem to be someone who sees the best in everyone whenever
> > >possible, I'm not surprised you read her rather differently (plus, I
> > >get the impression you may know her offline, and I do know people who
> > >are flame-war artists online and complete sweet, decent, wonderful
> > >people in Real Life. That might also be a factor.)
>
> > >> > But you're overlooking two important things.
>
> > >[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> > >> for our cats. We prefer to allow them to live a more natural
> > >> lifestyle.
>
> > >Ask Australians what they think of allowing cats to live "a more
> > >natural lifestyle.:)
>
> > >It's not as bad in North America as it is in Australia, but in both
> > >places, free-roaming cats are a serious threat to small birds and
> > >other small wildlife. That's in addition to the threats TO the cats
> > >from larger wildlife. If they roamed, my cats would be a threat to
> > >mice (good) and songbirds and chipmunks (not so good), as well as
> > >being at risk themselves from traffic, hawks, coyotes, and other
> > >larger predators.
>
> > >> IF you asked me to point out one single good issue/reason why most
> > >> people would choose to allow their cats out, I think it would be that
> > >[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> > >> flap that allows your cat to come and go as they please for this very
> > >> reason...
>
> > >Now, see, to me, having known cats killed by cars, killed or badly
> > >injured by hawks, killed by fishers, having litter boxes seems like a
> > >trivial amount of work in exchange for actually having the
> > >companionship of my cats, and not having them get injured or killed.
> > >Because it's a much bigger risk here, it weighs differently in making
> > >these decisions. HERE, I'd think someone was soft-headed and self-
> > >indulgent to let their cats roam. THERE, without many of the risks we
> > >take for granted, it seems reasonable, natural, and right. What
> > >happened to Ringo was, well, no place is completely safe, and
> > >sometimes you just hit the jackpot. You don't make decisions based on
> > >rare or freak events. Someone who knows I have cats and a dog could
> > >break into my house when I'm at work and do something awful to them,
> > >too. It could happen--but you can't live your life that way. You weigh
> > >the risks you think are real, and you make the best decisions you can
> > >for your own pets in your own circumstances. And circumstances are
> > >really different, in the UK and North America.
>
> > >Geeze, I think we've reached the stage of violently agreeing with each
> > >other.:)
>
> > >Lis
>
> > De-lurking myself - too many years ago, our beautiful 16 year old
> > tortoiseshell who was taking an early evening stroll inside our totally
> > fenced-in yard was brutally killed in front of 2 of my then young teenage
> > sons. New neighbors had moved in 3 weeks before & immediately replaced the
> > shared chain link fence with 6 ft high ugly board fence saying they wanted
> > privacy. Until Whiskey's death, we had no idea they had (monster) dogs - 2
> > Siberian huskies who broke through the wooden fence & grabbed & shook her to
> > death. The boys were screaming, I grabbed a shovel & tried to beat them off
> > unsuccessfully - only when my husband got the new neighbor to come outside &
> > call off his dogs did they release our cat. It was a horrible experience &
> > the jerk yelled at us - "look what your cat made my dogs do!" I forced the
> > jerk in the end to cover all our expenses for our cat's burial & the costs
> > for a new kitten including all veterinary costs for vaccinations, spaying etc.
> > It didn't make up for losing Whiskey, my wild girl who had been my cat long
> > before I had kids & who'd a terrible history before she was rescued in 1970 &
> > came to me. At that time, a co-worker came across a group of kids trying to
> > drown her in an apartment pool, trying to keep her underwater by bashing her
> > with sticks etc, chased off the kids, dragged her out of the water & brought
> > her into work. I'd never had cats, didn't even like them at that point, but
> > the sight of that small hissing, spitting orange black ball of fire just was
> > irresistible. Point of the story - no matter how safe you think you've made
> > things, you can never tell what might happen & you just have to be very
> > vigilant.
> > M.
>
> > --
> > Message posted viahttp://www.catkb.com-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm so pleased to meet you.
>
> I was devastated by your tragic story & horrified that the chap next
> door to you blamed you for what was clearly his dogs intrusion.
>
> I very much hope that your story has moved a few people to think about
> their arrangements too. Whilst I allow our cats out, it is only ever
> whilst I am at home & under supervision.
>
> I would say that our most dangerous predator has got to be the common
> fox. Thankfully we have never had to suffer anything like this, but it
> has certainly made me think about it. There are badgers, but since
> moving here, we have tried to survey the land around us & thus yet
> have never managed to locate a set anywhere within a 3 mile radius.
> We have fortunately never been bothered by foxes either, but that
> doesn't mean to say that a vixen might not choose to cub near us, so
> we must stay vigilant all of the time. It is quite sad really, because
> I love the common fox & would hate to have to chase one away. I think
> I would probably end up leaving food out for her so that she could
> feed her cubs & bring our fat-cat family indoors until the danger had
> passed.
> K.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

did you watch the programme the other night about foxes on channel 4?
'Meet the Foxes' it was, very interesting about how the urban foxes
live and survive and how cruel some people can be in getting rid if
them, it made me very sad when a pregnant vixen and her mate were shot
dead at the end by some chap who had been hired by some snotty nosed
**** who wanted breed fancy chickens in hjis back yard and who
couldn't be bothered to build a stronger enclosure for them or bring
them in at night into a proper brick chicken house. Watching it made
me feel so ashamed to be part of the human race in fact, that guy was
really irresponsible and should have taken more advice on how to keep
his chick safe, he will only get more foxes back, nasty ****.

some bits were really good, such as the 2 old guys who ran their own
fox rescue service and broguht sick foxes back to a compound to be
rehabilitated, so lovely, and then release them (probabaly only to be
shot by some ****** who wants to recreate the countryside in his tiny
backyard inthe middle of central london but not do it properly)

anyway, good programme, foxes are lovely, hope more people saw that
from watching it. yes they kill things but that is nature, they have
to eat and feed their young, and they are nowhere near as big a pest
or threat to nature than humans are.

bookie

CatNipped
April 20th 07, 06:57 PM
"sheelagh" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke

Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a free
militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government (more
a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the "Patriot
Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....

Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every citizen
must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law.
Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell me
the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have
thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!

Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths have
second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just might
pull out a gun and start shooting back.

Hugs,

CatNipped

Matthew
April 20th 07, 08:08 PM
"CatNipped" > wrote in message
...
> "sheelagh" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
>> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
>> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
> free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
> (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
> "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
> citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of
> the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean
> to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who
> would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
> have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
> might pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> Hugs,
>
> CatNipped
>

If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons holder
which I am proud to be a member
Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years only
158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is 158
in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%.

If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use even
if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and
brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are fooling
themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on our
nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a
sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts

bookie
April 20th 07, 11:17 PM
On 20 Apr, 20:08, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "CatNipped" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "sheelagh" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
> >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> >> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> > Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
> > free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
> > (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
> > "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> > Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
> > citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of
> > the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean
> > to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who
> > would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> > Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> > weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
> > have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> > bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
> > might pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> > Hugs,
>
> > CatNipped
>
> If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons holder
> which I am proud to be a member
> Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years only
> 158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is 158
> in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%.
>
> If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use even
> if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and
> brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are fooling
> themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on our
> nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a
> sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

thing is they may be able to kill alot more people in one rampage if
they had a gun than if they were running around waving a baseball bat
or similar offensive weapon.

we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider
how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to
wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely
available as it seems to be in your country.

Lis
April 21st 07, 12:16 AM
On Apr 20, 1:57 pm, "CatNipped" > wrote:
> "sheelagh" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
> > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> > that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a free
> militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government (more
> a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the "Patriot
> Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....

Um, see, this is the kind of thing that helps convince Europeans we're
all nuts over here. We do not generally have RPGs, tanks, or Warthogs.
We do not have the SERIOUS military weapons that would allow citizens
to defeat a serious military action by the federal government--or by
state governments, even. And even the NRA isn't seriously advocating
that we should.

> Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every citizen
> must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law.
> Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell me
> the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have
> thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!

The Virginia Tech killer bought his gun legally. The Columbine killers
were able to get their guns because there are no background checks for
gun sales at gun shows. If the NRA didn't so bitterly oppose even
minimal regulation to limit the availability of guns to criminals and
the mentally unbalanced, we'd have fewer anti-all-guns types, too.

> Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths have
> second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just might
> pull out a gun and start shooting back.

Um. Crime has gone down in other places, too. There just isn't a clear
trend on this in the statistics. Which is really the important point;
guns aren't nearly as significant as either the pro- or the anti-
forces believe.

Lis

Charlie Wilkes
April 21st 07, 12:21 AM
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:17:08 -0700, bookie wrote:
>
> we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider
> how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to
> wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely
> available as it seems to be in your country.

By now, for the U.S., it's a matter of cultural legacy. Suppose the U.S.
were to pass stiff gun control laws... what would be the result? There
would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts; they would
continue to own guns and dare the gov't to come take them away. Even if
the gov't prevailed, any confiscation process would take decades to
reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious
criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one.

Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for
those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who
are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It
might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political
gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they
are with their guns.

Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to
have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon.
If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might
not have killed so many people.

The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the
Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.

Charlie

Lis
April 21st 07, 12:24 AM
On Apr 20, 3:08 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "CatNipped" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "sheelagh" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
> >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> >> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> > Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
> > free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
> > (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
> > "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> > Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
> > citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of
> > the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean
> > to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who
> > would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> > Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> > weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
> > have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> > bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
> > might pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> > Hugs,
>
> > CatNipped
>
> If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons holder
> which I am proud to be a member
> Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years only
> 158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is 158
> in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%.
>
> If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use even
> if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and
> brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are fooling
> themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on our
> nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a
> sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts- Hide quoted text -

Gee, are you seriously arguing that the Virginia Tech shooting, or
Columbine, or a host of other incidents, would have been MORE bloody
if the perpetrators hadn't been able to get guns? If they'd been
limited to knives, baseball bats, or their bare hands? Really?

Now, if someone else present had A)had a gun, B)known how to use it
correctly, and C)remained steady enough to do so effectively, THAT
might have made the episode less bloody. The thing is, though,
relatively few people actually have enough training and experience to
do that, in those circumstances. But, call me crazy, but with or
without the presence of some level-headed individual with a gun, least
bloody of all would have been for Cho to have been denied access to
weapons, and to have been given the mental health care he so clearly
needed (and which school authorities had tried to get for him.)

Lis

Matthew
April 21st 07, 12:48 AM
"Lis" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 20, 3:08 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:
>> "CatNipped" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "sheelagh" > wrote in message
>> ups.com...
>>
>> >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
>> >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
>> >> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>>
>> > Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
>> > free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own
>> > government
>> > (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like
>> > the
>> > "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the
>> > situation....
>>
>> > Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
>> > citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation
>> > of
>> > the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you
>> > mean
>> > to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my,
>> > who
>> > would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so
>> > dishonest?!
>>
>> > Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
>> > weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
>> > have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
>> > bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
>> > might pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>>
>> > Hugs,
>>
>> > CatNipped
>>
>> If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons
>> holder
>> which I am proud to be a member
>> Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years
>> only
>> 158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is
>> 158
>> in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%.
>>
>> If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use
>> even
>> if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and
>> brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are
>> fooling
>> themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on
>> our
>> nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a
>> sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts- Hide quoted text -
>
> Gee, are you seriously arguing that the Virginia Tech shooting, or
> Columbine, or a host of other incidents, would have been MORE bloody
> if the perpetrators hadn't been able to get guns? If they'd been
> limited to knives, baseball bats, or their bare hands? Really?
>
> Now, if someone else present had A)had a gun, B)known how to use it
> correctly, and C)remained steady enough to do so effectively, THAT
> might have made the episode less bloody. The thing is, though,
> relatively few people actually have enough training and experience to
> do that, in those circumstances. But, call me crazy, but with or
> without the presence of some level-headed individual with a gun, least
> bloody of all would have been for Cho to have been denied access to
> weapons, and to have been given the mental health care he so clearly
> needed (and which school authorities had tried to get for him.)
>
> Lis

Good points but here is what I learned in college. When a sick'o like this
can't full fill his desire for massive blood shed. They turn into themselves
and become more delusion and tend to act out their fantasy with more
precision and determination. Hence the more bloodier the crimes. They
tend to act with more care and sickness in their plots. But there is a good
thing most turn on themselves

sheelagh
April 21st 07, 06:36 AM
On 20 Apr, 18:57, "CatNipped" > wrote:
> "sheelagh" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
> > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> > that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a free
> militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government (more
> a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the "Patriot
> Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every citizen
> must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law.
> Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell me
> the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have
> thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths have
> second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just might
> pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> Hugs,
>
> CatNipped


Now that you have explained some of the reasons (ie: cause & effect As
well as information regarding the the patriot act & voting against
your own government) why you feel so strongly about your rights to
defend your self against other lawless minded criminals, I find it
easier to understand why you feel so strongly about it.
The scenario that you presented was a good one for us to appreciate
why you do hold arms to protect yourself against being held against
your will by another's mercy & even to protect your property & your
lives. It also paints a good example as to why the thought of trying
to disarm public citizens would be such a problem, the logistics of
the situation & the nightmare involved if any political party were to
present this as a vote pulling idea to get the general public to
support such an idea....

You will appreciate that when we hear the headlines that come over, be
they through TV or even the newspapers and the Internet, but never the
details- not one of them paints the same picture as you do. All we get
to hear are the mind numbing numbers of innocent victims (particularly
when there are children killed)...which is why we find it so hard to
comprehend the reasoning behind it all....

Obviously we are aware that these things happen the world over, but
even more so in the USA in recent years. With no gun culture of our
own, it is difficult to appreciate the depth of this problem and
strength of feeling behind your civil rights;in fact I would even go
so far as to say that I don't even know what this act is about & why
it has the government in office pulling their hair out? Is it because
the people voted against the government who tried to do something
about disarming the general public...?

Of course there will always be a certain number of outlaws(Anywhere in
the world), who will do anything to get what they want, or to put
their point across to the people. An example of in our own back yard
would be referring to northern Ireland for instance in our own case.
For years & years they assassinated individuals, blew army patrols up,
targeting innocent men, women & even children. You have only to look
at the last major atrocity that happened when a bomb went off in
Omagh..That particular bombing killed 28 people(including unborn set
of twins due a week later to one of the women who lost her life... &
wounded 220 others as well. It was made all the worse by misleading
statements made by the IRA in the form of coded a warning, that there
would be a blast (Independent republican army), leading innocent
victims and bystanders right next to the blast so that they felt the
full effect of that fateful bombing on 8-16-98..We do understand what
violence is like and we have had it visit on our own doorstep.....

I am glad that you made this post. In doing so, you have educated us
in the way of your culture, rather than leaving us to assume what we
will on the minimal detail that we are fed by the media in general. It
is wrong of any of us to do this, but we do in our ignorance because
it is in human nature.
I knew when I posted about our mutual ignorance that it might cause a
back lash, but I felt it was worth it just to get us to talk about
such issues.....

One might argue that this is totally OT:, but I don't think so. In
understanding comes wisdom. We are forever arguing over the indoor
outdoor issue regarding our cats, & sometimes it becomes so overheated
that we even fall out over it which is silly. If you sit & think about
it, we all do what we feel is the best thing for our cats. It would be
wrong to say that one person doesn't really care about their cat/s
because they don't do what I think is the best/safest answer for our
beloved furry friends....

Each of us does what we feel is the right thing for our cats, going on
social factors, relative threat, experience knowing our furrballs
personally. We should respect that each slave is doing what they feel
is the best thing for their lords & lady's....

I have explained to you all that we used to let all of our cats out
when they wished to go out because it is normal to do that over here.
I can only speak for myself though. There are others here from the UK
who do live in built up areas & find it impossible to allow their
faithful friends out like you all feel in the USA. I live in a village
where hardly anything ever happens & we have no roads that are of
immediate danger to my cats. But since the shooting of Ringo, I have
been forced to rethink their safety. Because I already have some
indoor/penned cats, it is not such a major thing deciding that it is
time to review our security. Instead of not allowing any of them out,
I have decided to give all of my cats the same amount of limited
freedom. It is what I feel is best for my babes.....

I don't have the risk of dogs next door ( but might in the future..
who knows ?!!) The same as the jackass who flew around Virginia.. you
face each problem if you"have to"..you can't live on maybes or
perhaps...it would be like telling my daughter that she can't go back
to university in case it happens over here-again, logistics.
If I can cat proof my garden, then all of the cats get a certain
amount of freedom to do as they please in the safety of our own land.
I have to trust that my immediate neighbors won't use my cats as
target practise. Mind you, she is 65 years old & never had a gun in
her life, so hopefully that won't be a problem.....

It is a battle of conscience that I hope that I have got right. In the
meantime, all of my cats will have to put up with reins only outings
to the meadow, but with any luck, by the end of the summer, the whole
garden will be totally cat proofed & I can allow them a certain amount
of freedom.

And, I RESPECT what you all feel is best for your cats too:o)
S;o)

PS: I am now off to read the rest of the posting on this thread which
are ready to go bang in my face for bringing the subject up..
Oh well, that is life. we have to agree to disagree on some things-
but if we must, lets stick to declawing or something really
dreadful..?!!!

sheelagh
April 21st 07, 06:49 AM
On 20 Apr, 20:08, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "CatNipped" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "sheelagh" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
> >> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> >> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> >> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>
> > Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
> > free militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
> > (more a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
> > "Patriot Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> > Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
> > citizen must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of
> > the law. Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean
> > to tell me the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who
> > would have thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> > Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> > weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
> > have second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> > bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
> > might pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> > Hugs,
>
> > CatNipped
>
> If have some information on that about Florida Concealed weapons holder
> which I am proud to be a member
> Since 1986 1.2 million people have been issued the permit in 20 years only
> 158 people have been arrested due to a gun violation or crime. That is 158
> in 20 years out of 1.2 million people what is that less than 0.001%.
>
> If you took the guns away they would find some other weapon to use even
> if it was their bare hands. The crimes would be even more bloodier and
> brutal. Simple fact if people don't like this truth than they are fooling
> themselves PEOPLE KILL they have since the beginning of time it is on our
> nature as a predator no matter how "civilized" society becomes. It is a
> sick thought but the truth sometimes it hurts- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

However civilized we think we are, there a million maniacs that don't
agree with us Matthew. Now that I have had a couple of damned good
reasons why this is so unworkable for you, I respect your need to keep
them.

However, I would be most interested to hear what the" Right to Bare
Arms" debate that Catnip mentioned though....?

When you produce figures like that Matthew, how can I argue with you,
lol?

Ignorance is certainly not bliss & each animal has to fight for their
place, including us too. I see your need to keep your guns now that we
have debated the issue. It was our ignorance that blinded us to the
facts, which was why I brought the subject in the first place. I can
see that your laws work, It is just a shame about the crazy idiots
that lead others to believe that this is an almost daily
occurrence.....
Thanks for the education lesson here..(truely!!)
S;o)

sheelagh
April 21st 07, 07:29 AM
On 21 Apr, 00:21, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:17:08 -0700, bookie wrote:
>
> > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider
> > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to
> > wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely
> > available as it seems to be in your country.
>
> By now, for the U.S., it's a matter of cultural legacy. Suppose the U.S.
> were to pass stiff gun control laws... what would be the result? There
> would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts; they would
> continue to own guns and dare the gov't to come take them away. Even if
> the gov't prevailed, any confiscation process would take decades to
> reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious
> criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one.

I agree with you now that I know a bit more about it.

> Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for
> those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who
> are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It
> might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political
> gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they
> are with their guns.
( Who are the NRA?)

A very good point you have made here. In fact I think it would be a
very good idea to introduce that idea over here whilst they still have
the opportunity to. There are stringent controls here regarding an
application for a gun licence, including character backgrounds,
references, the need to renew that licence on a yearly basis, & a
general background check by the police who come out to visit you &
interview you before they will issue you with one.....

In fact it goes further than that. The housing of the gun & ammunition
are also a major concern to the Police, so you have to be able to
prove that it is stored in an appropriate locked & sealed cabinet so
that no one can get to it except you. That way if something does go
wrong, you are to blame, end of story. It's your gun & your
responsibility to ensure it stays that way.....

The competency idea should be introduced, so that there is yet another
chance for any psychotic freaks might be recognised in training,
rather than when they are firing rounds off @ fellow pupils. that was
a terrible shame for all concerned.;o(

> Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to
> have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon.
> If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might
> not have killed so many people.
Actually charlie, we have already experienced an introduction of this
already over here. We have sky Martial that board air crafts so that
if any freak tries to hijack it, there is a pair of marshals to ensure
the safety of the passengers should the need arise...

Some schools in London have recently had armed police in schools where
there is a threat of gang gun culture already growing there. I find it
horrific that things have gone this far. But I far prefer that, to the
thought of my child getting caught in the middle of it. I think Bookie
has already pointed out, that if they are of dubious character, the
youths prefer carrying knives.. but the incidents of gun drive by
shootings is happening over here. Also, quite recently there have been
3 deaths in young boys for what appears to be no reason at all, other
than that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time!!

> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the
> Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.

OMG!!!
I did check it out. It is a horrific story, isn't it?
45 killed & 58 injured, and all of this was done by the man that was
supposed to be the school board member, Andrew Kehoe...Dreadful.
He blew the school up, murdered his wife and set bombed his house to
pieces including his wife and his entire animal stock which he made
sure couldn't escape!!!!! , then drove towards the school & called
over school superintendent & blew himself up & him too...
Now that is really sick. I guess wee just live in a sad society that
really does need addressing. but how does one go about filtering the
lunatics in society?
A really sad story, made horrific by the acts of a deranged
idiot...Those poor young children.
We have to do the best that we can to understand one another & stop
the ignorance of everyone, & that can only be achieved by sharing
experience & knowledge too...

Knowledge is power & we could all do with a few lessons on other
peoples cultures, to know what they are & are & respect them...

S;o)

Charlie Wilkes
April 21st 07, 08:53 AM
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:29:12 -0700, sheelagh wrote:

> ( Who are the NRA?)

The National Rifle Association... the public face of U.S. gun nuttery.
>

>> Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense
>> to have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed
>> weapon. If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA,
>> he might not have killed so many people.
> Actually charlie, we have already experienced an introduction of this
> already over here. We have sky Martial that board air crafts so that if
> any freak tries to hijack it, there is a pair of marshals to ensure the
> safety of the passengers should the need arise...

Yeah, the U.S. has a system like that too, for airliners. But there are
a lot of places besides airliners where people can go berserk. In a
culture where psychotic freaks can buy a gun with no questions asked, it
might be a good idea to encourage responsible private citizens to carry
concealed weapons.
>
? I think Bookie
> has already pointed out, that if they are of dubious character, the
> youths prefer carrying knives..

I'll bet they would prefer carrying handguns if they could get them.
>
>> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out
>> the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.
>
> OMG!!!
> I did check it out. It is a horrific story, isn't it? 45 killed & 58
> injured, and all of this was done by the man that was supposed to be the
> school board member, Andrew Kehoe...Dreadful. He blew the school up,
> murdered his wife and set bombed his house to pieces including his wife
> and his entire animal stock which he made sure couldn't escape!!!!! ,
> then drove towards the school & called over school superintendent & blew
> himself up & him too... Now that is really sick. I guess wee just live
> in a sad society that really does need addressing. but how does one go
> about filtering the lunatics in society?

It can't be done. The best that can be done is to aim for policies that
reduce the likelihood that lunatics will be able to carry out murderous
schemes without intervention. But what those policies might be is not as
certain as political ideologues might wish to think.

Charlie

Lynne
April 21st 07, 01:10 PM
on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:21:09 GMT, Charlie Wilkes
> wrote:

> Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing
> for those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out
> people who are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such
> programs. It might also get the political support of the NRA, because
> the political gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and
> responsible they are with their guns.

Charlie, I have always found your posts to be insightful and
intelligent, but I have to take issue with the above statement. The NRA
is the _reason_ we have easy access to guns, often with no waiting
periods and shoddy background checks. I am a gun owner, but I am a
proponent of much stricter laws regarding the purchase of deadly weapons
and therefore will *never* be affiliated with the NRA.

Here in Kentucky and in many states, I can walk into a store, pick out a
weapon from a tiny .22 pistol to an assault rifle, or an assortment of
guns *and* ammunition, sign a form that says I am sane, show my drivers
license and walk out with my purchase 5 minutes later after they make
one phone call to a database which has been restricted from gathering
accurate information. That's exactly how the NRA wants it.

<spit>

Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back
reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing,
accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow,
but I am certainly not going to hold my breath. The gun lobby in this
country is sickening to me, and we all know our politicians have no
backbones. I support the right to bear arms, but I do not support the
right to bear arms indiscriminantly.

--
Lynne


"We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
We are brave enough to bend to cry
And sad enough to know
We must laugh again"

~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

Barry
April 21st 07, 02:42 PM
On Apr 20, 7:21 pm, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
There
> would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts

I think that's putting it mild.

Next thing you know the price of guns would sky rocket

they'd be sold on the DL (down low) like dregs

sheelagh
April 21st 07, 06:08 PM
On 21 Apr, 08:53, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:29:12 -0700, sheelagh wrote:
> > ( Who are the NRA?)
>
> The National Rifle Association... the public face of U.S. gun nuttery.
>
>
>
> >> Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense
> >> to have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed
> >> weapon. If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA,
> >> he might not have killed so many people.
> > Actually charlie, we have already experienced an introduction of this
> > already over here. We have sky Martial that board air crafts so that if
> > any freak tries to hijack it, there is a pair of marshals to ensure the
> > safety of the passengers should the need arise...
>
> Yeah, the U.S. has a system like that too, for airliners. But there are
> a lot of places besides airliners where people can go berserk. In a
> culture where psychotic freaks can buy a gun with no questions asked, it
> might be a good idea to encourage responsible private citizens to carry
> concealed weapons.
>
>
>
> ? I think Bookie
> > has already pointed out, that if they are of dubious character, the
> > youths prefer carrying knives..
>
> I'll bet they would prefer carrying handguns if they could get them.
>
>
>
> >> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out
> >> the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.
>
> > OMG!!!
> > I did check it out. It is a horrific story, isn't it? 45 killed & 58
> > injured, and all of this was done by the man that was supposed to be the
> > school board member, Andrew Kehoe...Dreadful. He blew the school up,
> > murdered his wife and set bombed his house to pieces including his wife
> > and his entire animal stock which he made sure couldn't escape!!!!! ,
> > then drove towards the school & called over school superintendent & blew
> > himself up & him too... Now that is really sick. I guess wee just live
> > in a sad society that really does need addressing. but how does one go
> > about filtering the lunatics in society?
>
> It can't be done. The best that can be done is to aim for policies that
> reduce the likelihood that lunatics will be able to carry out murderous
> schemes without intervention. But what those policies might be is not as
> certain as political ideologues might wish to think.
>
> Charlie

> I'll bet they would prefer carrying handguns if they could get them.

Your right. Now that I am not quite so ignorant (but still somewhat
confused..), I can explain that rightly or wrongly, that is why we
Brits get so angry with the USA & their Gun Culture. We blame our
youths for trying to emulate some type of gang warfare culture that
you would expect to find in the Bronx, is already up & running in the
UK. It is mostly in Cities of course such as London, Manchester,
Birmingham ect. It tends to be racial;when I say racial, it might be
the West Indians fighting for rights/access to drugs, or simply
fighting over girlfriends- always trivial.......

The point is that I am reliably informed that for as little as 50
($100), you can get your hands on a hand gun. Our kids are buying them
too, which is why it scares us so much. There are absolutely no
checks, any child can get their hands on one if they know the right
people. It is terrifying really when I think about it.
We may have stringent rules regarding the ownership of a legal weapon,
but we can't do a damned thing regarding our kids buying black market
ones. It would seem that these days, some of the youth of today are
willing to take that risk & face the consequences *IF* they are
caught.....

So baring this in mind, you will see that even the hard line laws
don't stop anyone who is determined to get their hands on one. As with
everything else in the world, it is not so much what you know as who
you know. The only good thing about having these laws in place is that
we don't see carrying a gun or even owning one as an every day normal
thing. 99% of us have no idea what a hand gun looks like or how to
work one either. this can only be a good thing right now. However, if
guns do become prevalent in the UK, then we will have to re think our
laws & how to apply them....
I knew as my fingers crossed the keyboard that I was picking up a
damned Hot Potato, what I didn't realise was that it would burn so
many of us...

It is a very controversial subject.....
S;o)

T
April 21st 07, 07:59 PM
In article >,
says...
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:17:08 -0700, bookie wrote:
> >
> > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider
> > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to
> > wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely
> > available as it seems to be in your country.
>
> By now, for the U.S., it's a matter of cultural legacy. Suppose the U.S.
> were to pass stiff gun control laws... what would be the result? There
> would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts; they would
> continue to own guns and dare the gov't to come take them away. Even if
> the gov't prevailed, any confiscation process would take decades to
> reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious
> criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one.

So true. I'm of the Charlton Heston "You'll pry my gun from my cold,
dead hands" camp. The issue that you gloss over entirely is the illegal
gun market. That's one that would take a very long time to put down.


> Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for
> those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who
> are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It
> might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political
> gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they
> are with their guns.

In Rhode Island you're required to obtain what is called a blue card
before you can purchase a handgun. This involves taking and passing a
written exam.

The blue card is valid for the lifetime of the holder. This is not a
permit to carry, simply a handgun safety course that all legal handgun
owners must have.

> Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to
> have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon.
> If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might
> not have killed so many people.

I used to work at the state attorney general's office. The chief and
deputy of the Bureau of Criminal Identification both carried weapons.

When you entered the building you're in a glass fishbowl. That glass is
bulletproof. I can recall sitting in the deputies office one day and
noticed a sampling of the glass with lots of indentations and a couple
of outright holes. Each was circled and labeled with weapon type and
caliber.

We found out that certain rifle rounds would go right throug bulletproof
glass. Got to love a field test.

> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the
> Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.

Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except
yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little
safer.

Charlie Wilkes
April 21st 07, 08:41 PM
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 07:10:21 -0500, Lynne wrote:

>
> Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back
> reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing,
> accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow,
> but I am certainly not going to hold my breath.

You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out of
this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore
ineffective. I may be wildly optimistic in thinking the NRA could be
brought to support competency training/certification as a mandatory
condition of owning guns. I see it as the most politically possible
route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even
so I don't really expect it to happen.

Charlie

Charlie

Charlie Wilkes
April 21st 07, 08:48 PM
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 14:59:03 -0400, T wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
>
>> The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out
>> the Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.
>
> Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except
> yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little
> safer.

I don't think so. Look at the way people drive. And, more to the point,
carrying a gun would not have prevented the incident mentioned above.
Gun-toting freaks are just one of many risks in life, and having a gun
under your jacket won't do a damn thing to protect you from most of them.

Charlie

sheelagh
April 21st 07, 09:21 PM
On 21 Apr, 19:59, T > wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
> > On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:17:08 -0700, bookie wrote:
>
> > > we are aware that people kill, not the guns, but you have to consider
> > > how thease psychos might behave if one of the things they may use to
> > > wreak their havoc on innocent people (ie guns) was not so freely
> > > available as it seems to be in your country.
>
> > By now, for the U.S., it's a matter of cultural legacy. Suppose the U.S.
> > were to pass stiff gun control laws... what would be the result? There
> > would be mass civil disobedience amongst the gun nuts; they would
> > continue to own guns and dare the gov't to come take them away. Even if
> > the gov't prevailed, any confiscation process would take decades to
> > reduce the numbers of guns in circulation to the point where a serious
> > criminal or psycho would have difficulty procuring one.
>
> So true. I'm of the Charlton Heston "You'll pry my gun from my cold,
> dead hands" camp. The issue that you gloss over entirely is the illegal
> gun market. That's one that would take a very long time to put down.
>
> > Probably the better course is mandatory competency training/testing for
> > those who wish to own firearms. That might at least weed out people who
> > are too disorganized or psychotic to participate in such programs. It
> > might also get the political support of the NRA, because the political
> > gun nuts are always boasting about how disciplined and responsible they
> > are with their guns.
>
> In Rhode Island you're required to obtain what is called a blue card
> before you can purchase a handgun. This involves taking and passing a
> written exam.
>
> The blue card is valid for the lifetime of the holder. This is not a
> permit to carry, simply a handgun safety course that all legal handgun
> owners must have.
>
> > Also, sadly, things have come to a pass where it probably makes sense to
> > have trusted people in public buildings, etc., carry a concealed weapon.
> > If someone had been able to shoot back at this lunatic in VA, he might
> > not have killed so many people.
>
> I used to work at the state attorney general's office. The chief and
> deputy of the Bureau of Criminal Identification both carried weapons.
>
> When you entered the building you're in a glass fishbowl. That glass is
> bulletproof. I can recall sitting in the deputies office one day and
> noticed a sampling of the glass with lots of indentations and a couple
> of outright holes. Each was circled and labeled with weapon type and
> caliber.
>
> We found out that certain rifle rounds would go right throug bulletproof
> glass. Got to love a field test.
>
> > The question of just who to trust is non-trivial, though. Check out the
> > Bath school massacre on Google... that guy was on the school board.
>
> Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except
> yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little
> safer.

> Exactly. The reality of it is that you can't trust anyone except
> yourself. So maybe arming the entire populace might make us a little
> safer.

Good God, when I brought this issue forward for debate, I had no idea
what a nest of snakes I was opening.....

> In Rhode Island you're required to obtain what is called a blue card
> before you can purchase a handgun. This involves taking and passing a
> written exam.

I think that this an excellent idea & one that our law makers could/
would or should consider in the UK. However, I can only see this as
workable in the short term.- when I say the short term I mean that it
might work for say the next 30 years, possibly less. The reason for
this is because with time, comes change of the younger generation &
their tolerant views which it would appear that you all in the USA
seem to call a liberal view? Correct me if I am wrong..!

I would like to think that if that time did come to pass that it would
be mandatory for us all to have to take a similar test, but reality
dictates that in 30 years, we will have an entirely different set of
views because with time, comes change & with change comes different
possibilities and realities. Nevertheless, one thing that has always
been there & readily available to all if they search far enough..

The black market is just as readily available to the psychotic & this
is where the reality of the problem lies...

In the "Real World", the black market is there to supply the illicit
and the unobtainable, whether it be a national insurance number,
passport, drugs or arms. Even our governments indulge in such issues,
so whether we like it or not, corruption is here to stay. For one
instance of our own government in the UK, you have only to look at the
enquiry of arms sent to Sierra Leone, in exchange for rights to
extract minerals that are abundantly rich there, & our own resources
are now depleted in the North Sea where we have been living off the
fat of the sea, & now we pay the price for our indulgence for all of
those years...

They ( The black Market) will always be the scourge of the world &
also always be there & readily available to those who are determined
to obtain the gun licences they seek to get round the system. It has
always been there, & however hard any government tries( or pretends to
try), this market will be there. It has existed since written records
began in one form or another, & I honestly can't think of a way to
eliminate it. Take prostitution. It is one of the more tolerable
illicit illegal trades. it has now got to the stage where we feel that
the time has come to legalise it because of circumstance.. which is
what my point was when I told you that with time, comes change and
tolerance of our views. There is also the plague of aids to consider,
which is why I feel that anything that we try and introduce now, will
not be altogether relevant in the future.

I think that the conclusion to this debate is, that however well meant
our intentions are, we can't stop the inevitable which is sad but
true....
S;o)

Charlie Wilkes
April 22nd 07, 10:04 AM
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 08:50:17 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> Interesting that you'd say that, Charlie, 'cause here in Massachusetts
> that is exactly how it's done. Before you can apply for a handgun permit
> for ANY reason, not just concealed carry for defense, you must complete
> a state certified course on gun handling.

I think more states should roll out such programs. This guy in VA had a
history of mental problems, but the people who knew him agreed that his
condition deteriorated sharply in the weeks before the shootings. By the
time he bought his guns, he might have been too mentally disorganized to
sign up for and complete a firearms safety course. I saw a picture of
the express packet he sent to NBC... the writing was barely legible, he
got the address wrong, and he added an extra digit to the zip code.

Charlie

Barry
April 22nd 07, 01:33 PM
On Apr 21, 3:41 pm, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 07:10:21 -0500, Lynne wrote:
>
> > Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back
> > reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing,
> > accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow,
> > but I am certainly not going to hold my breath.
>
> You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out of
> this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore
> ineffective. I may be wildly optimistic in thinking the NRA could be
> brought to support competency training/certification as a mandatory
> condition of owning guns. I see it as the most politically possible
> route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even
> so I don't really expect it to happen.
>
> Charlie
>
> Charlie

You mention guns, then here come the nuts

Nomen scored 100 on his gun test
haha, I wouldn't have told that

Lynne
April 22nd 07, 03:36 PM
on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:04:38 GMT, Charlie Wilkes
> wrote:

> I think more states should roll out such programs.

I couldn't agree with you more.

--
Lynne


"We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
We are brave enough to bend to cry
And sad enough to know
We must laugh again"

~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

sheelagh
April 22nd 07, 04:44 PM
On 22 Apr, 10:04, Charlie Wilkes >
wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 08:50:17 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> > Interesting that you'd say that, Charlie, 'cause here in Massachusetts
> > that is exactly how it's done. Before you can apply for a handgun permit
> > for ANY reason, not just concealed carry for defense, you must complete
> > a state certified course on gun handling.
>
> I think more states should roll out such programs. This guy in VA had a
> history of mental problems, but the people who knew him agreed that his
> condition deteriorated sharply in the weeks before the shootings. By the
> time he bought his guns, he might have been too mentally disorganized to
> sign up for and complete a firearms safety course. I saw a picture of
> the express packet he sent to NBC... the writing was barely legible, he
> got the address wrong, and he added an extra digit to the zip code.
>
> Charlie

Agreed! Mind you, most things we think about are in hindsight..

Wow!!
That was observant of you. We only got a 2 second slot look at it on
the news over here & they didn't bother to point that out. I think
they should have really because it was relevant...

S;o)

Lynne
April 22nd 07, 08:31 PM
on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:44:37 GMT, sheelagh
> wrote:

> That was observant of you. We only got a 2 second slot look at it on
> the news over here & they didn't bother to point that out. I think
> they should have really because it was relevant...

Obviously the guy was mentally deranged, but I don't think his writing
when he sent that package was indicitive of whether or not he could take
and pass a firearms safety course prior to his killing spree. When he
sent that package, he had just killed 2 people and was preparing to kill
as many more as he could. Based on other information that has been
shared about him, he probably could have passed a firearms safety course
prior to April 16. He was described by the gun shop clerk as polite, and
he was practicing at a firing range. Based on his mental health history,
he shouldn't have been able to get a gun in the first place according to
US Federal Law. There is an instant so-called background check system in
pace which was developed by the friggin NRA, but that background check is
virtually useless. That's why he was able to get those guns.

--
Lynne


"We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
We are brave enough to bend to cry
And sad enough to know
We must laugh again"

~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

Lynne
April 23rd 07, 08:07 PM
on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:52:14 GMT, wrote:

> how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a
> parent

I'd LOVE to see that, a license to breed!

--
Lynne, dreaming


"We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
We are brave enough to bend to cry
And sad enough to know
We must laugh again"

~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

sheelagh
April 23rd 07, 09:31 PM
On 23 Apr, 20:07, Lynne > wrote:
> on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:52:14 GMT, wrote:
>
> > how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a
> > parent
>
> I'd LOVE to see that, a license to breed!
>
> --
> Lynne, dreaming
>
> "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
> We are brave enough to bend to cry
> And sad enough to know
> We must laugh again"
>
> ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

I couldn't agree with you more....
S;o)

Barry
April 23rd 07, 10:10 PM
On Apr 23, 12:52 am, wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:41:28 GMT, Charlie Wilkes
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 07:10:21 -0500, Lynne wrote:
>
> >> Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back
> >> reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing,
> >> accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat crow,
> >> but I am certainly not going to hold my breath.
>
> >You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out of
> >this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore
> >ineffective. I may be wildly optimistic in thinking the NRA could be
> >brought to support competency training/certification as a mandatory
> >condition of owning guns. I see it as the most politically possible
> >route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even
> >so I don't really expect it to happen.
>
> Charlie,
>
> You may not be aware but the founding of the NRA in 1871 was originally as a
> training organization to teach our soldiers and civilians how to become
> marksmen. Part of that also involves knowing what is your target and what is
> beyond it so you do not shoot in an unsafe direction. The NRA also conducts
> police marksmanship courses as well as civilian training for recreation,
> hunting and personal protection.
>
> The NRA has a program called "Eddie Eagle" that is a non-political and
> gun-neutral safety program for kids - it does not teach gun handling or
> shooting but rather gun *avoidance*. It teaches the simple message that if
> a child finds a firearm that they must do four things:
>
> 1. Stop!
> 2. Don't Touch!
> 3. Leave the area!
> 4. Tell an adult!
>
> Most government indoctrination centers^W^W^Wpublic schools refuse to allow
> that message to be presented to children because of the letters N,R, and A.
> Instead those schools prefer teaching kids how to put taxpayer-funded
> condoms on dildos and call that "safety education".
>
> Looking into the other aspects of a culture of violence is required, such
> as the influence of movies and television from "Hollyweird" that glorify
> violence with firearms along with the "Michael Moore-ons" of the world that
> further berate non-criminal gun ownership, and "Gangsta Rap" that promotes
> drugs, violence and degradation of women as illustrated in their "music" &
> videos. A culture of latchkey kids with perhaps little parental guidance
> (how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a
> parent? Will the ACLU support that?) and lots of gang-pressures tempting
> kids into a subhuman subculture rather than "readin' writin' & 'rithmatic"
> that would make them become productive and healthy members of society.
> --
>
> Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl

what is there to know or learn about raising a child

you goto work and buy the food, or you grow it

you don't be out ripping up in the bars, druggin, stealing, lying,
cheating etc..
You love your children, encourage them...

What am I missing? we have to tell women to love their children?
no

what people need is 2 things, some need both, some need one or the
other.

1. education
2. help/secondchance/support

sometimes people just need help, no questions asked, no changes to go
through just to get that help

is just my opinion

T
April 23rd 07, 11:45 PM
In article >,
says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: Lynne >
>
> >Based on his mental health history,
> >he shouldn't have been able to get a gun in the first place according to
> >US Federal Law. There is an instant so-called background check system in
> >pace which was developed by the friggin NRA, but that background check is
> >virtually useless. That's why he was able to get those guns.
>
> Error #1) The NRA makes a convenient target, but they had nothing to do with
> the design of the NICS check.

You threw me for a second, I know NICS as BCI/NCIC.

But you're right, politicians designed it. If you want something to get
completley ****ed up, let a politician touch it.

> Error #2) The NICS check has been quite effective in blocking gun
> purchases by people with criminal records.
>
> If you want to blame a group for the lack of Cho's mental health records
> being in the database......blame homosexuals. It was their efforts to keep
> medical records related to AIDS out of government databases that resulted
> in laws that make it illegal for the FBI to maintain personal records on ANY
> forced hospitalization for mental illness in the NICS database. What we have
> here is "The law of unintended consequences" in action.

No it wasn't our fault. It wasw the insurance companies trying to dip
into the information.

Matthew
April 24th 07, 07:11 AM
"Lynne" > wrote in message
m...
> on Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:52:14 GMT, wrote:
>
>> how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a
>> parent
>
> I'd LOVE to see that, a license to breed!
>

I would vote for it

> Lynne, dreaming
>
>
> "We are strong enough to stand tall tearlessly
> We are brave enough to bend to cry
> And sad enough to know
> We must laugh again"
>
> ~ Nikki Giovanni, 4/17/2007, Virginia Tech

Matthew
April 24th 07, 07:12 AM
"Barry" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 23, 12:52 am, wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:41:28 GMT, Charlie Wilkes
>>
>>
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 07:10:21 -0500, Lynne wrote:
>>
>> >> Now if this incident could be the catalyst for getting the NRA to back
>> >> reasonable restrictions on gun purchases (including training, testing,
>> >> accurate background tests and waiting periods), I would gladly eat
>> >> crow,
>> >> but I am certainly not going to hold my breath.
>>
>> >You're probably right. I assume that any policy changes that come out
>> >of
>> >this mass murder will be politically innocuous and therefore
>> >ineffective. I may be wildly optimistic in thinking the NRA could be
>> >brought to support competency training/certification as a mandatory
>> >condition of owning guns. I see it as the most politically possible
>> >route toward a meaningful improvement in the U.S. gun culture, but even
>> >so I don't really expect it to happen.
>>
>> Charlie,
>>
>> You may not be aware but the founding of the NRA in 1871 was originally
>> as a
>> training organization to teach our soldiers and civilians how to become
>> marksmen. Part of that also involves knowing what is your target and what
>> is
>> beyond it so you do not shoot in an unsafe direction. The NRA also
>> conducts
>> police marksmanship courses as well as civilian training for recreation,
>> hunting and personal protection.
>>
>> The NRA has a program called "Eddie Eagle" that is a non-political and
>> gun-neutral safety program for kids - it does not teach gun handling or
>> shooting but rather gun *avoidance*. It teaches the simple message that
>> if
>> a child finds a firearm that they must do four things:
>>
>> 1. Stop!
>> 2. Don't Touch!
>> 3. Leave the area!
>> 4. Tell an adult!
>>
>> Most government indoctrination centers^W^W^Wpublic schools refuse to
>> allow
>> that message to be presented to children because of the letters N,R, and
>> A.
>> Instead those schools prefer teaching kids how to put taxpayer-funded
>> condoms on dildos and call that "safety education".
>>
>> Looking into the other aspects of a culture of violence is required,
>> such
>> as the influence of movies and television from "Hollyweird" that glorify
>> violence with firearms along with the "Michael Moore-ons" of the world
>> that
>> further berate non-criminal gun ownership, and "Gangsta Rap" that
>> promotes
>> drugs, violence and degradation of women as illustrated in their "music"
>> &
>> videos. A culture of latchkey kids with perhaps little parental guidance
>> (how about training as a mandatory condition if you intend to become a
>> parent? Will the ACLU support that?) and lots of gang-pressures tempting
>> kids into a subhuman subculture rather than "readin' writin' &
>> 'rithmatic"
>> that would make them become productive and healthy members of society.
>> --
>>
>> Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl
>
> what is there to know or learn about raising a child
>
> you goto work and buy the food, or you grow it
>
> you don't be out ripping up in the bars, druggin, stealing, lying,
> cheating etc..
> You love your children, encourage them...
>
> What am I missing? we have to tell women to love their children?
> no
>
> what people need is 2 things, some need both, some need one or the
> other.
>
> 1. education
> 2. help/secondchance/support
>
> sometimes people just need help, no questions asked, no changes to go
> through just to get that help
>
> is just my opinion
>

Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make
sense ;-)

Barry
April 24th 07, 08:30 AM
On Apr 24, 2:12 am, "Matthew" > wrote:

> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make
> sense ;-)

my eyes look 2 raisins in a glass of strawberry milk
whipping this music, hands must obey my mind

fe fe fe fe fe fe fe <--fast

that's the sound the cats make on the back of my chair

cats purr for their own pleasure? I think they're just happy like we
get happy

like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could
have something to do with a broom in my hand.

Matthew
April 24th 07, 01:16 PM
"Barry" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 24, 2:12 am, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
>> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make
>> sense ;-)
>
> my eyes look 2 raisins in a glass of strawberry milk
> whipping this music, hands must obey my mind
>
> fe fe fe fe fe fe fe <--fast
>
> that's the sound the cats make on the back of my chair
>
> cats purr for their own pleasure? I think they're just happy like we
> get happy
>
> like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could
> have something to do with a broom in my hand.
>

Keep it up Barry you will make someone a good little woman one day ;-)

Matthew
April 24th 07, 01:20 PM
> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:57:16 -0500, "CatNipped"
> > wrote:
>
>>"sheelagh" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>>
>>> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
>>> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
>>> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>>
>>Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
>>free
>>militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
>>(more
>>a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
>>"Patriot
>>Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>>
>>Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
>>citizen
>>must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law.
>>Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell
>>me
>>the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have
>>thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>>
>>Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
>>weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
>>have
>>second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
>>bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
>>might
>>pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>>
>>Hugs,
>>
>>CatNipped
>
> *Applause*
>
> Criminals, by their very nature, disregard the laws. Crime
> *prevention* by use of a firearm goes largely unreported in the
> mainstream media unless it's an unusual case such as a senior citizen
> with a walker using a firearm to protect herself. Florida enacted a
> CCW system that had the hoplophobes of the gun control lobby crying
> that Florida would turn into a wild-west scene with blood in the
> streets. To no rational person's surprise that hasn't happened. Nor
> has it happened in Kennesaw, GA where firearms ownership is mandatory
> subject to certain exclusions.
>
> Vermont and Alaska have a "liberal" CCW system with few restrictions
> and encumbrances upon law abiding gun owners, and you don't see the
> same per-capita firearms related crimes as in the firearms
> prohibitionist's Utopias of urban Washington D.C., NYC, Chicago and
> L.A. that only grant licensed ownership to high-profile celebrities
> and those "connected" to the ruling politicians.
> --
>
> Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl

You beat me to it. I love Florida's new law no more having to back down in
your own home,
With Florida having the one of the most set criminals gun laws 10-20-life
It still is not a deterrent. Just hits morning someone was found shoot due
to criminal activity a few towns over. Criminals are criminals they will
get the guns some how some way not matter what laws are in place to stop
them

CatNipped
April 24th 07, 05:47 PM
"Lis" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 20, 1:57 pm, "CatNipped" > wrote:
>> "sheelagh" > wrote in message
>>
>> ups.com...
>>
>> > haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
>> > all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
>> > that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
>>
>> Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
>> free
>> militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
>> (more
>> a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
>> "Patriot
>> Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
>
> Um, see, this is the kind of thing that helps convince Europeans we're
> all nuts over here. We do not generally have RPGs, tanks, or Warthogs.
> We do not have the SERIOUS military weapons that would allow citizens
> to defeat a serious military action by the federal government--or by
> state governments, even. And even the NRA isn't seriously advocating
> that we should.

Um, Iraqis seem to be giving our army quite a run for their money right
now - and they have nothing but guns and home-made bombs, not tanks or
Warthogs. A guerilla force is the hardest thing in the world to overcome -
we took our freedom from England with the first guerilla army in history.

Also, it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where the US army would use
bombs for indiscriminate destruction on American soil, so for these reasons,
armament is a non-issue.

>> Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
>> citizen
>> must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the
>> law.
>> Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell
>> me
>> the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would
>> have
>> thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
>
> The Virginia Tech killer bought his gun legally. The Columbine killers
> were able to get their guns because there are no background checks for
> gun sales at gun shows. If the NRA didn't so bitterly oppose even
> minimal regulation to limit the availability of guns to criminals and
> the mentally unbalanced, we'd have fewer anti-all-guns types, too.

It's also amazingly easy to buy a gun from a criminal thus bypassing *ANY*
type of check, again passing restrictive gun laws sounds really nice in
theory (and I truly wish it was that easy), but it's a case of shutting the
barn door *LONG* after the livestock has escaped. There are *SO* many
illegal guns in our nation that it would impossible to round them all up.
Again, and I can't stress this enough, laws that may be obeyed by
responsible citizens will be totally ignored by criminals and we'd end up
with all the guns being held by criminals (who would then have a field day
while using their guns *KNOWING* that honest citizens are defenseless).

>> Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
>> weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
>> have
>> second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
>> bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
>> might
>> pull out a gun and start shooting back.
>
> Um. Crime has gone down in other places, too. There just isn't a clear
> trend on this in the statistics. Which is really the important point;
> guns aren't nearly as significant as either the pro- or the anti-
> forces believe.

Please cite these statistics - the ones I've read show that violent crime
has gone down *MUCH* more in states with CCW laws (Florida, Alaska, Texas,
Vermont) than they have in places where guns are restricted (California, New
York, Illinois).

Hugs,

CatNipped

>
> Lis
>

Barry
April 24th 07, 08:32 PM
On Apr 24, 8:16 am, "Matthew" > wrote:
> "Barry" > wrote in message
>
> oups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 24, 2:12 am, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
> >> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to make
> >> sense ;-)
>
> > my eyes look 2 raisins in a glass of strawberry milk
> > whipping this music, hands must obey my mind
>
> > fe fe fe fe fe fe fe <--fast
>
> > that's the sound the cats make on the back of my chair
>
> > cats purr for their own pleasure? I think they're just happy like we
> > get happy
>
> > like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could
> > have something to do with a broom in my hand.
>
> Keep it up Barry you will make someone a good little woman one day ;-)

me? in touch with my femininity? is that what you're saying? lol

Matthew
April 24th 07, 09:54 PM
"Barry" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Apr 24, 8:16 am, "Matthew" > wrote:
>> "Barry" > wrote in message
>>
>> oups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 24, 2:12 am, "Matthew" > wrote:
>>
>> >> Keep smokin what you are smokin there Barry! You are starting to
>> >> make
>> >> sense ;-)
>>
>> > my eyes look 2 raisins in a glass of strawberry milk
>> > whipping this music, hands must obey my mind
>>
>> > fe fe fe fe fe fe fe <--fast
>>
>> > that's the sound the cats make on the back of my chair
>>
>> > cats purr for their own pleasure? I think they're just happy like we
>> > get happy
>>
>> > like a fresh swept house, they get really good. Although that could
>> > have something to do with a broom in my hand.
>>
>> Keep it up Barry you will make someone a good little woman one day ;-)
>
> me? in touch with my femininity? is that what you're saying? lol
>

We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress
Nick and the others ;-)

Oh I got one we know you dress up as Hillary Clinton on the weekends also
;-)

T
April 24th 07, 10:26 PM
In article >,
says...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:57:16 -0500, "CatNipped"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>"sheelagh" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >>
> >>> haven't tackled this issue. We simply "can't" understand why you would
> >>> all rather keep your guns, than outlaw them except to the few people
> >>> that need them or deserve one for a reason? Bookie would probably joke
> >>
> >>Leaving aside any philosophical reasoning ("the right to bear arms", "a
> >>free
> >>militia", being able to defend ourselves *against* our own government
> >>(more
> >>a concern now, I think, than ever in our past given things like the
> >>"Patriot
> >>Act", etc.)), let's just look at the logic of the situation....
> >>
> >>Say tomorrow that suddenly all guns were outlawed in the US - every
> >>citizen
> >>must immediately turn in all their firearms or be in violation of the law.
> >>Would that stop school shootings and mass murders? Oh, you mean to tell
> >>me
> >>the psycho down the street *DISOBEYED THE LAW*???!! Oh my, who would have
> >>thought that criminals and sociopaths would be so dishonest?!
> >>
> >>Reality check - in states that have *allowed* the carrying of concealed
> >>weapons, violent crime has *gone down*! It seems that even psychopaths
> >>have
> >>second thoughts about pulling out a gun and shooting down innocent
> >>bystanders when they know that some of those innocent bystanders just
> >>might
> >>pull out a gun and start shooting back.
> >>
> >>Hugs,
> >>
> >>CatNipped
> >
> > *Applause*
> >
> > Criminals, by their very nature, disregard the laws. Crime
> > *prevention* by use of a firearm goes largely unreported in the
> > mainstream media unless it's an unusual case such as a senior citizen
> > with a walker using a firearm to protect herself. Florida enacted a
> > CCW system that had the hoplophobes of the gun control lobby crying
> > that Florida would turn into a wild-west scene with blood in the
> > streets. To no rational person's surprise that hasn't happened. Nor
> > has it happened in Kennesaw, GA where firearms ownership is mandatory
> > subject to certain exclusions.
> >
> > Vermont and Alaska have a "liberal" CCW system with few restrictions
> > and encumbrances upon law abiding gun owners, and you don't see the
> > same per-capita firearms related crimes as in the firearms
> > prohibitionist's Utopias of urban Washington D.C., NYC, Chicago and
> > L.A. that only grant licensed ownership to high-profile celebrities
> > and those "connected" to the ruling politicians.
> > --
> >
> > Craig, Kathi & "Cat Five" the tabby girl
>
> You beat me to it. I love Florida's new law no more having to back down in
> your own home,
> With Florida having the one of the most set criminals gun laws 10-20-life
> It still is not a deterrent. Just hits morning someone was found shoot due
> to criminal activity a few towns over. Criminals are criminals they will
> get the guns some how some way not matter what laws are in place to stop
> them
>
>
>

RI also has Chapter 11, Section 8, Paragraph 8 which shields residents
from prosecution and civil liabilities. Break into my place and you're
getting shot.

But our CCW law needs to be changed. Right now the sitting Attorney
General has complete control over who gets permits and who doesn't. And
the currently sitting AG is an anti-gun nut.

Barry
April 26th 07, 03:30 AM
On Apr 24, 4:54 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:

> We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress
> Nick and the others ;-)
>
> Oh I got one we know you dress up as Hillary Clinton on the weekends also
> ;-)

you on thin ice jumping up and down slim

Matthew
April 26th 07, 03:42 AM
"Barry" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Apr 24, 4:54 pm, "Matthew" > wrote:
>
>> We know that you dress up like Pamela Anderson on the weekends to impress
>> Nick and the others ;-)
>>
>> Oh I got one we know you dress up as Hillary Clinton on the weekends also
>> ;-)
>
> you on thin ice jumping up and down slim

Hah so you mean it is true ;-)

Just messing with you old man :^)