DoNoHarm
by action or inaction
I'm sure that could put paid to many a zombie.
I was referring to the classic wooden bat which proved so effective in this documentary:
definitely.
I'm sure that could put paid to many a zombie.
I was referring to the classic wooden bat which proved so effective in this documentary:
Britain has always been this way. They've always had kings and queens, guns were illegal, hunting was illegal, everything was regulated etc. part of the reasons the rebel colonists beat them was because the colonists grew up on guns while British troops first held them when they were conscripted into the British army. It's the Vikings that baffle me. They went from some of the most feared raiders to these socialized pansies.
Britain has always been this way. They've always had kings and queens, guns were illegal, hunting was illegal, everything was regulated etc. part of the reasons the rebel colonists beat them was because the colonists grew up on guns while British troops first held them when they were conscripted into the British army. It's the Vikings that baffle me. They went from some of the most feared raiders to these socialized pansies.
In the first major exchange at Lexington and Concord, only one American bullet out of 300 found its mark, and only one man in 15 hit anybody. Six years later at the battle of Wetzell's Mill in North Carolina, 25 expert American riflemen, who had fought spectacularly at King's Mountain, fired from close range at British Lt. Col. James Webster as he led his troops on horseback across a ford they were covering. Although 33 or 34 shots were fired at him (some men were able to reload and fire twice), Webster was not hit once. An even more embarrassing example of the lack of marksmanship training occurred during the battle for Fort Ticonderoga in 1777. As the British advanced toward the American positions, an American officer ordered a sergeant to pick off a British skirmisher only 40 yards away. This touched off wholesale unauthorized firing and the enemy dropped back, leaving the original target on the ground. The "casualty" turned out to be a drunken Irishman from the 47th Regiment who was unhurt. In addition to eight cannons, the Americans had fired about 3,000 rounds from 1,000 muskets at less than 100 yards. All they hit was a British lieutenant and two Indians, with one fatality among the Indians.
Where did you get this idea? When was hunting illegal in Britain? I briefly trained in the UK in the '80s and quite of few of the guys we dealt with were avid deer "stalkers" (their word for hunting). As far as I know, that has not changed. There are seasons for hunting all kinds of birds, small game, and deer.
And the Brits lost the revolution for the same reasons the Americans "lost" Vietnam...political will (both the positive will of the patriots and the negative will of the British politicians and population in Britain). ...And the French. Without them it would have been another 20 years or so before independence was realized. It had little or nothing to do with firearms familiarization.
From Postscripts "Guns of the American Revolution":
Americans don't realize how free we still are until you go spend some time in other places. The English peasant still lives and is alive and well. He can be told not to own a gun not to even carry a pocket knife that has a lock on the blade. A thousand years of inbreeding has done it's work. Hundred of years ago, the peasants who stood up to the lordships got either hung, or shipped off to Australia. Same thing there. Tell the Aussies they can't have guns and they just go "Oh. Okay, I won't own a gun." End of argument.
Shitty argument, but okay. You're entitled to dangerously over simplified opinions. And you started off with the incorrect statement that "hunting is illegal"...your entire premise is flawed.
So where do the American "peasants" in a growing sect of the US population come from? There's a growing population of Americans that are more than willing to not just give up theirs, but also take away ours. They were no where to be found (in these numbers) not more than 50 years ago. What's the "thousand years of peasantry" argument for the hipsters, yuppies and snowflakes in CA, MD, and most of the population centers? They've been under a socialist yoke for far less time the Brits were under royalty. Are Americans that much quicker to cave? We have two, maybe three generations left before this country is every bit as bad as the rest of the world. The answer is far more complex than you'd like to think, and over simplifying it is horribly dangerous.
The snowflakes and other liberal brainwashed idiots may have had their day. This past election has shown there are still lots of Americans willing to over turn the liberal socialist apple cart. The ride is now turning with the denial of the Clintons to the white house, and some house cleaning is going to be done. Turning back the leftist bullhocky that has almost ruined this country is already starting to happen with Trumps pick of cabinet people.
We're far from done, and in fact may be just beginning to set things right again.
As four England, the last time I was there, it was done.
What's wrong with these knives again?
Politically incorrect paint?
Yep. Guess they figure zombie words or images will endow Brits with violent zombie-killing power.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/803/article/2/made (PDF available here)
Amendment of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988
2.—(1) The Schedule to the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988(1) (which specifies offensive weapons for the purposes of section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988) is amended as follows.
(2) In paragraph 1, after sub-paragraph (r) insert—
“(s)the weapon sometimes known as a “zombie knife”, “zombie killer knife” or “zombie slayer knife”, being a blade with—
(i)a cutting edge;
(ii)a serrated edge; and
(iii)images or words (whether on the blade or handle) that suggest that it is to be used for the purpose of violence.”.