The was probably a cocktail waiting just of camera!
This is very typical of the mindset that has pervaded British gun control for 3oo years – Guns for me but not for thee – The royals and sundry aristocracy and establishment insiders had no problem getting permits to keep any type of gun in the home and even use it there – but at the same time these pictures were taken, the family of the average Tommy conscripted to service could not get a handgun or rifle permits to keep a firearm in the home without some political pull.
Armed self defense in the UK was always for the right people – not the hoi polloi http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html
Target practic without whinning little liberal paniewastes sniveling about shooting ISIS thugs
“…Armed self defense in the UK was always for the right people – not the hoi polloi.”
That isn’t true. It was not always like that, as document at the link you posted says in the very first line:
“In 1900 the British government trusted the people with firearms and to be their own guardians.”
I believe this photo was from back in the day when they used to just shoot boat people…
About 1900, there was an incident where anarchists did an armed bank robbery and the citizens gave chase. The unarmed metropolitan police borrowed revolvers from the citizens….
Bobbies were armed with trunchions and citizens packed revolvers and nobody blinked.
Regarding that VE Day night out by the princesses….pay Hollywood no mind…you can bet that Scotland Yard had some very discrete, very serious people shadow them.
However, no doubt the movie will be good fun….recall “King Ralph”…
I quote my venerable aunt: “The yanks declare they are republicans but if the UK put the queen up for sale…the yanks would buy her in an instant.”
I recall the 1976, US bicentennial…a year of pageantry and celebration…..
It was a non-event until the “Royal Visit” then it took off with a bang….and ended abruptly when the Queen flew home…..
Lighten up…the sun shines this day………
The Duchess had a baby girl, BTW (IKYMI), the name “Alice” seems to be top of the betting at 5/4 odds.
Jolly good show. Righto. (Monuments in England lit up in pink- see Daily Mail)
OHferkissake read some history dammit!
The Yomen were relieved of Bows and swords as soon as the French were beaten
– The individual right to arms was legislated against by King James II
– Blackstones response in the commentaries eludes to periodic civil disarmament.
– George III sought to curtail civilian arms rights and had a go at collecting their weapons.Guard.
= In 1870, the national Gun Licensing Act taxed gun owners the sum of ten shillings a year each default of which resulted in confiscation and revocation of licence (your right to own)
Britain has always been a classist nation and the upper classes take care of their ruling class continuity by restricting the ability of armed revolt – Cromwell was the last British leader who allowed full armament of the yoman class
OHferkissake read your own post dammit!
Your remarks were on gun control.
And then read the first line of the document to which your link pointed.
Then resume spewing, as you will.
Edward I outlawed golf and other games because they interfered with MANDATORY ARCHERY PRACTICE. IOW it was the reverse of arms control. Being armed and proficiency with arms was not a privilege but rather an obligation.
Nothing is ever, never nor always.
Gun control is a fairly modern concept…..arriving with the totalitarian movements of the 19th century…such as Prussia.
“…1870, the national Gun Licensing Act….” was a tax, something like a carbon tax, a revenue raiser more than anything.
The was probably a cocktail waiting just of camera!
This is very typical of the mindset that has pervaded British gun control for 3oo years – Guns for me but not for thee – The royals and sundry aristocracy and establishment insiders had no problem getting permits to keep any type of gun in the home and even use it there – but at the same time these pictures were taken, the family of the average Tommy conscripted to service could not get a handgun or rifle permits to keep a firearm in the home without some political pull.
Armed self defense in the UK was always for the right people – not the hoi polloi
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html
Target practic without whinning little liberal paniewastes sniveling about shooting ISIS thugs
“…Armed self defense in the UK was always for the right people – not the hoi polloi.”
That isn’t true. It was not always like that, as document at the link you posted says in the very first line:
“In 1900 the British government trusted the people with firearms and to be their own guardians.”
I believe this photo was from back in the day when they used to just shoot boat people…
About 1900, there was an incident where anarchists did an armed bank robbery and the citizens gave chase. The unarmed metropolitan police borrowed revolvers from the citizens….
Bobbies were armed with trunchions and citizens packed revolvers and nobody blinked.
Regarding that VE Day night out by the princesses….pay Hollywood no mind…you can bet that Scotland Yard had some very discrete, very serious people shadow them.
However, no doubt the movie will be good fun….recall “King Ralph”…
I quote my venerable aunt: “The yanks declare they are republicans but if the UK put the queen up for sale…the yanks would buy her in an instant.”
I recall the 1976, US bicentennial…a year of pageantry and celebration…..
It was a non-event until the “Royal Visit” then it took off with a bang….and ended abruptly when the Queen flew home…..
Lighten up…the sun shines this day………
The Duchess had a baby girl, BTW (IKYMI), the name “Alice” seems to be top of the betting at 5/4 odds.
Princess goes home
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3065593/Duchess-Cambridge-steps-looking-immaculate-just-hours-giving-birth.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3065147/Royal-Baby-odds-reveal-Charlotte-favourite-ahead-Alice-Kate-Middleton.html
Jolly good show. Righto. (Monuments in England lit up in pink- see Daily Mail)
OHferkissake read some history dammit!
The Yomen were relieved of Bows and swords as soon as the French were beaten
– The individual right to arms was legislated against by King James II
– Blackstones response in the commentaries eludes to periodic civil disarmament.
– George III sought to curtail civilian arms rights and had a go at collecting their weapons.Guard.
= In 1870, the national Gun Licensing Act taxed gun owners the sum of ten shillings a year each default of which resulted in confiscation and revocation of licence (your right to own)
Britain has always been a classist nation and the upper classes take care of their ruling class continuity by restricting the ability of armed revolt – Cromwell was the last British leader who allowed full armament of the yoman class
OHferkissake read your own post dammit!
Your remarks were on gun control.
And then read the first line of the document to which your link pointed.
Then resume spewing, as you will.
Edward I outlawed golf and other games because they interfered with MANDATORY ARCHERY PRACTICE. IOW it was the reverse of arms control. Being armed and proficiency with arms was not a privilege but rather an obligation.
Nothing is ever, never nor always.
Gun control is a fairly modern concept…..arriving with the totalitarian movements of the 19th century…such as Prussia.
“…1870, the national Gun Licensing Act….” was a tax, something like a carbon tax, a revenue raiser more than anything.