Jump to content

timps

Members
  • Posts

    1,864
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by timps

  1. Plenty ideas on the MSM opinion peaces about motives, how accurate they are, well just the same as it’s the USA and NATO. But they range from its a sabre rattling to the EU if the rumoured further economic sanctions are applied they can hit other pipelines from other countries. Trying to destabilise the stock markets with panic. Try to cause conspiracy theories and accusations. Why their own pipeline? well blowing up their own pipeline isn’t going to cause WWIII if actually caught. The above is no way my view just pointing out unproven conspiracies can come from both sides. This conspiracy rabbit hole can be fun 😂
  2. Last time I looked the FT and the Economist were MSM (Main Stream Media). You have posted MSN I keep saying MSM for Mainstream Media which is the Oxford dictionary accepted acronym for it. Regardless the FT hasn’t wrote any articles stating the referendum is legit nor have they had journalists on the front line of snake island. The FT’s reporting on Ukraine tends to be (but not limited to) quoted sources where they post Russian sources then as balance Ukraine sources. if an opinion piece was written in the FT condemning the referendum would you accept it ?
  3. The above doesn’t answer my question. Which pay wall news agency should I be using to be getting the independent truth then? Strangely enough the MSM have reported that the snake island soldiers are alive correcting the original reports. The exact same for the ghost of Kiev, MSM reporting the truth about it now. That’s the point of independent news, they report retractions when original news is found to be inaccurate or wrong. Does your pay wall news articles report retractions or is it all correct first time no fog of war to contend with ?
  4. So only news that’s behind a pay wall is unbiased? I’ve gone for media that you can see for free or paid by advertisers. Is it perfect or totally unbiased? Probably not but piece them together and you get a good outlook. so who’s palms do I have to grease to get totally unbiased news behind this pay wall?
  5. I did but you don’t like MSM news so pointless posting again.
  6. Only for ladies though… well we best stop or we will derail the thread from factual information and credible YouTube sources 🤔
  7. Oh ****** you are back do we need to find you a good coach and make sure you get a gun that fits and is Peter’s website still up 😂😂😂 welcome back
  8. But it’s a random guy on YouTube so must be true.🤔😀 Just type in “Patrick Lancaster fact check” in google gives you all you need to know, he’s been involved with staged propaganda, family move to Russia and wild conspiracy theories rather than independent reporting. I think he is the modern day Lord Haw Haw. I’m no fan of the Main Stream Media but pretty much everything no matter what side by random people on YouTube sell to a specific audience. This model of journalism needs subscribers and/or crowdfunding to make money. The only way is to set your channel up is with confirmation bias in mind for either side pro or against Putin. If you upset your core subscribers with independent balanced thoughts then watch your channel tank. People who don’t need it as their primary income can be more independent but their channels don’t get the publicity.
  9. I don’t dispute that at all, I have said in the previous comments there are those prepared to fight in a civil war over this so plenty want to breakaway from Ukraine. But for a democratic vote we need to know how many for and against for it to be of any significance. My original post was aimed at those that think this will be a genuine democratic vote and we in the west are hypocrites for not accepting it.
  10. Why would that be? some on here would have you believe that the entire inhabitants of these occupied areas are totally pro Russian so why the need to protect themselves(yes I was being facetious).😜 So basically you agree with me that the vote is a sham which was my only point as some believe it to be the same level of democracy as the brexit vote Which is a view you are certainly entitled to, as is mine “that you have to answer verbally and the soldier marks the answer on the sheet and keeps it” is not democratic in any anyway, especially as the solider is a foreign solider of occupation who you are telling to leave by your no vote. Not too sure why the position of the border matters, as I said it only sparked my interest in whats going on in the region not that it was the only view in the area as I’m fully aware there are different views. It was the polish border, this last time in March I flew into Wrocław (quite a lot of Ukrainian refugees) then on Zagan (large US army base there) then to Rzeszów (refugees) and a day in Krakow (refugees) to get the flight back. I certainly got a view from polish and Ukrainian nationals which was untied in the hatred of Putin’s Russia, and the locals were very interested on my view on it as it was early days back then.
  11. I’m not saying it but the news media is reporting it, I’m sorry I don’t have a random guy off YouTube video of it but there are countless MSM links to it, here are just 2. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-marches-farther-into-liberated-lands-separatist-calls-urgent-referendum-2022-09-19/ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63013356.amp As to why they are doing it, you have your view I have mine, which is any armed fighters turning up to your door asking you to vote on whether what they are doing is right or not can never be deemed free or democratic. Also training at the request of a sovereign nation and driving tanks into and annexing Crimea are two different things. That’s a Straw man argument, if you want to start a thread about Syria then feel free but it has no bearing here. Hypocrisy only exists if the person you are debating with states that everything NATO does is correct. I haven’t gone through everything NATO does to draw that conclusion one way or the other. I spend a lot of time in Eastern Europe, I was very very near the Ukrainian border at the end of March this year taking to quite a few people about it, hence my interest in it. I have never been to Syria so I have no idea what they think so I would probably stay out of that debate anyway. But your statement brings nothing to this debate regarding my own personal views as I might actually agree with you on Syria or I might not, I don’t know enough about it to form a view as of this debate.
  12. I don’t remember soldiers coming to my door asking me to verbally state my preference on brexit. Maybe the brexit outcome would have been different if pro European troops had asked the British public at gunpoint. NATO will continue to support a sovereign nation that was invaded and wishes to fight the aggressor nothing more. If you believe that it should be a civil war with no outside agitators then fair enough. However that means Russia must not be involved. If you believe outside agitators are allowed then why is NATO bad Russia good. Last time I looked there wasn’t any NATO troops on the ground however there are Russian ones. If Russia had just supplied equipment like NATO then this would have been over by now.
  13. I have never asked for proof, where have I said that? Your views are your own and you are entitled to them. But you have asked “how do I know” and that requires proof on my behalf. I have an opinion which may be right or wrong so I don’t actually know but I strongly believe it. as for the other points. No I’m on my phone and texting is not great without glasses but I don’t see the lack of punctuation just the lack of the word “I” as I posted above. I did not bring up the issues of grammar you did, I’m just pointing out maybe people in glass houses and all that. You told me to block you, I don’t feel the need to block anyone if you don’t want to engage then don’t quote me as I have no intention of blocking but will respond to direct quotes. My point about debating is I know there is no point trying to change your views, rightly or wrongly you will stick to them so no point trying to change them. But I will defend my views when quoted by you.
  14. It’s you that keeps quoting my posts on multiple threads, I only respond to your ramblings on my posts if you don’t want to engage me then just don’t quote me. Believe me when I say debating with you is like baptising a cat … pointless. Hence why I have left you alone to your views the same cannot be said of you on multiple threads for me. I did not draw the conclusion about the American revolution being relevant, the post I was responding to did. It’s not hard to understand I was responding to a post that mentioned the American revolution and I disagreed about the comparison. You seem to completely miss out the post I was responding too and attribute the whole thing to me. very odd. If you want me to critique your spelling, grammar and punctuation I’d be here all month. I’ve never done that but obviously you think it wins you points in an argument. I understand what is written sorry you have difficulty. Yep I missed the word “I” from between the words “cannot” and “believe” . not too sure why that simple mistake offended you so much. But basically you can’t understand that you constantly demand proof from others for their views but offer none for your own views. This somehow wins you an argument. Where do I say that you have to accept my views? I don’t, but I don’t have to accept yours. Demanding I prove my views whilst you won’t prove yours is a futile debating point that you seem to hang your hat on.
  15. Well, if you had actually read my post as a whole and the quoted post contained in it that I was responding to, I’m not too sure how you couldn’t see that my post was in response to a post drawing comparison to the war of independence and France’s involvement. I think my first line of "It is an interesting premise however the war of independence was just that, Independence from a foreign power, France’s involvement was solely…" Should have set the context and the fact the whole post it was in response to was actually quoted above it in full. Your bias was to forget all the other parts of the post just to go after Ukraine oppressing them (which I never mentioned either happening or not) and Russia allowing them independence at the majority’s behest, and I do strongly disagree with this independence from Putin ever happening. You have zero proof of anything you say but you believe it, so why cannot believe what I say or is it only you that is relieved of your burden of proof when posting your views ? Why Scotland why not Northern Ireland, how do you think that would have played out if the Republic of Ireland had openly supported those involved in the armed struggle across the border? In terms of how many countries has Russia invaded , and not given independence to eventually well for Ukraine that’s the whole point …. Them ….
  16. You do seem to like taking parts of my posts out of context rather than reading them as a whole. On other threads when we have discussed things it seems you read things out of my post that are not conferred, the whole point of my post was in relation to the comparison to the American war of independence and the involvement of France. However, your conformation bias has some how made this into it is disingenuous to say they will be subservient to their new masters. Regardless of which master they choose be it Ukraine or Putin a master they will have and not independence as was the case with France’s involvement with the American revolution. If the republic of Donbas were at any point to do something that would anger Putin are seriously saying that he would allow it to happen with no consequence? I have in no way conferred that Ukraine would not behave similarly however if Manchester claimed independence by force backed by an outside nation, I would assume it would be met with force from the rest of the UK no matter how many from Manchester supported it. Regarding the majority wanting this “independence” I have seen no evidence for or against on numbers only that some in the region, with the backing of Russia are prepared to take up arms, and some with the backing of Ukraine are fighting back. However Russia are in no way going to give them uncontroled independence even if they do prevail the whole context of my post.
  17. The problem we have is clause 27 for firearms or 28 for shotguns. "28 Special provisions about shot gun certificates. [F11(1)Subject to subsection (1A) below, a shot gun certificate shall be granted or, as the case may be, renewed by the chief officer of police if he is satisfied that the applicant can be permitted to possess a shot gun without danger to the public safety or to the peace." It is such a broad-brush legislation it gives the chief officer of police the ability to refuse a grant or renewal based on whether he/she is satisfied or not which is completely subjective to the individual chief officer of police hence the discrepancies between forces. Cases have gone to court on security issues and the above sections have been successfully used to win those cases for the police or pass the threshold for reasonableness so costs are not awarded against the police even though they lost the case which makes it a very expensive day out to prove you were right. The latter happened to a friend of mine and he wished he had just done as they asked as it would have been significantly cheaper and less hassle than court even though he won. All it takes is the chief of police’s FEO to stand up in court and say he/she is not satisfied with the security arrangements due to a risk assessment, insert whatever drivel about too many guns so will not use the cabinet in a rush for fear of damaging an expensive gun rubbish (yes this was said by a FEO) and section 27 / 28 of the firearms act requires them not to grant or renew. As long as they have some rubbish reason the judge will almost certainly say it will pass the test of reasonableness to ask the court for a ruling therefore costs are not awarded should you win. The advice from my friend’s experience is pick your battles wisely as the only people that win in court are the ones paid to be there.
  18. It is an interesting premise however the war of independence was just that, Independence from a foreign power, France’s involvement was solely “The enemy of my enemy is my friend" the French might have tried to influence or seek favour with the new republic but that was as far as it got the USA was truly independent. If you think the Donbass or Crimea are ever going to be truly independent republics then you are going to be in for a disappointment. Whatever regime would ever end up in these so-called new republics they would have to be totally and unwaveringly subservient to Putin in every aspect. Should they stray from this path then there would be another Russian backed “war of independence” to free them from the tyranny of (insert Putin’s new villain of choice here). Based on that it is nothing more than a land grab, I don’t see the president of the USA asking the president of France if it is ok to do something, the same would never be said about the new Donbass republic.
  19. Most opportunist thieves don’t have grinders to hand, if they ever got hold of a grinder it would be pawned in cash generator so they could buy drugs. If you are going with grinders and an assortment of tools you are classed as a professional thief and as the British standard says the chances of stopping them is going to be too expensive to be practical. Fortunately most thieves are of the opportunistic type. A thread on PW summed it up, they were burgled by opportunist thieves who ransacked the house but they couldn’t gain entry to the cabinet. The police told them to give his gun to a friend who had a SGC and all his ammo for at least 6 months. Because if they came back with the sole intent of breaking into the cabinet the cabinet would be breached as they would be prepared this time but it did it's job to prevent opportunists. Likewise, for me too, for years my cabinet could have been stuck to the wall with double sided sticky tape no FEO was bothered. However, GMP went through a very damming audit and every current certificate holder was reassessed based on the recommendations of this audit so my bolts were checked, I had to remove all papers from the top shelf and expose all 4 bolt heads for inspection. My mate has his cabinet knocked back as he had used screw heads. If you follow the guidance at least it doesn’t give a jobs worth any ammo to knock your cabinet back should your area go through the same audit process as GMP in the future.
  20. To be fair to BS 7558 they have always known the limitations of the standard from day one. It starts off in the introduction of BS 7558 by saying they assume the average potential thief is an opportunist and not a determined criminal specifically seeking to obtain firearms, who in their own words would be difficult to counter effectively by inexpensive means. So, they are not interested in that type of thief as they accept you are never going to stop them without a bank safe/vault and great expense which is why the “reasonably practicable” bit of the legislation to store firearms is there. If the thief comes with a grinder in hand they accept your guns are gone, but if they just have a basic pry bar or screw driver to get in the house then they hope a BS 7558 cabinet this will deter / stop them.
  21. BS 7558 doesn’t specify much about the construction of the cabinet but it does mention how many differs a lock should have and the type of fixings needed to be used. So in respect for the fixings yes its lifted off the standard, there is however the added instruction in the standard that the force required to pull the appropriate fixing bolt through any attachment point provided shall be not less than 2 kN. Therefore, to make a cabinet that conforms to BS 7558 means you have to send two identical cabinets off to an independent test laboratory for testing to see if it can withstand a 5 minute attack from common hand-tools. The tools listed are Club hammer 1.8 kg, Flat cold chisel overall length 200 mm and blade width 25 mm, Jemmy. The Lab has 5 minutes to inspect then a further 5 minutes to attack, if they can remove it from its mount (if the mount fails rather than the cabinet then this does not count) or gain entry within 5 mins it fails. A second test is then performed by a 2nd person from the lab on a second cabinet for a further 5 min, at any vulnerable point(s) identified in the first test with no prompting during the test. The reasoning behind an attack test rather than specification on design was because it was demonstrated that a specification which centred only on the design and construction features of a gun cabinet was insufficient to provide adequate resistance to sustained forcible attack. Cabinets made to the most stringent existing design and construction requirements still provided points of weakness which could be breached in less than 1 min by the methods of physical attack described in the standard. Therefore, for BS 7558 you can build your cabinet to whatever spec you want as long as you take into account the notes listed in section 4 construction (locks, fixings and fixing holes etc.) Send two identical cabinets off to an independent test laboratories for testing. If it then passes the attack test then this design of cabinet conforms to BS 7558 no matter how it is made. The only issue I foresee with BS 7558 is that laboratory staff are not to a set standard. Send it to two different labs lab 1 : both technicians are retirement age and never done a days exercise in their lives. Lab 2: both technicians are male 25 and play prop forwards at high level. In those instances the cabinets are not subjected to the same test.
  22. I couldn't find any reference to what @timps quoted, perhaps you could point us to it? It’s in Cabinets clause 11 page 31 “11 provision of at least 4 fixing holes to take not less than 10mm diameter fastening devices.” so with cabinets you need 4 holes with fixings devices of not less than 10 mm diameter edit to add: GMP now inspect bolt heads, I know one person required to change fixings because of it and my last inspection they made me for the first time remove all my papers off the top shelf to inspect my bolt heads in a cabinet that has been installed and inspected for years.
  23. Home office guidance states the requirement for size is :- at least 4 fixing holes to take not less than 10mm diameter fastening devices. With a recommendation of expanding bolts, chemical anchors or toggle bolts This guidance is also confirmed in BS7558 which is the British standards for gun cabinets . For guidance I know GMP will not accept slotted screw head type fixings only bolts, but your force may differ.
  24. While it might "technically" get around the conditions on your cert you’ve just given a random stranger a load of money as a gift with no legal recourse should they not deliver. As a seller you’ve just given your gun away to a dealer who can now do with it as he wants. I know it’s a lot of if’s … however it’s a lot of trust, more trust than just sending your cert off? The law takes a dim view of you trying to circumvent it, if you ask a lawyer for clarification, they are going to ask why have you just given £xxxx to a random stranger so he can just give a gun to a random shop and pay them £xx to give it to another random shop who then gives it to you? No one is under any illusion that you haven’t bought the gun and tried to circumvent the law therefore any lawyer is going to state the instruction on the cert stands. Now don’t ask the question of a legal professional and just do it what are the chances of getting caught who knows.
×
×
  • Create New...