Friday, August 16, 2013

ATF Show: With Special Guest...

THE MAD AUSSIE!!!

That's right kids.  JamieR his own bad self.  Expect a lively gun debate as Jamie is a traditional Aussie and there for has no testicals what-so-ever.  Expect him to make brilliant arguments like... "Well crime only happens to you if you're involved in drugs and stuff."

A: Guiness Black, Shiner Bock, Bulleit Rye Whiskey, and Russels Reserve.   Yeah... its a tough life.

T:  I haven't smoked today dammit.  I have to do better.

F: The 1911 I made with my own hands.

Here's the link!  Y'all stop by.  Hope ya enjoy it.

Also listen up.  If you want to skype into the show all you have to do is create a listener account.  Go here and create the account then sign in and go to the show page.   When the show goes live a skype icon will appear on the page and if you click it you will be able to skype into the guest que.

Because we're awesome like that.

36 comments:

Luke said...

A: Yuengling
T: Brick House cigar.
F: Rock River LAR-8

Vidad said...

A: A nice strong Oolong with ginseng. (I was potting up tea plants [Camellia sinensis] today for my nursery business... it just fit.) Later, probably straight vodka.

T: Don Tomas SE Connecticut.

F: Quad 150mm rail guns

Nate said...

six... create an account and skype in tonight. it will probably sound a lot better than a phone line.

Vidad said...

Boy... I doubt it. It's one step down from the landline I'm on now. My internet connection here is pretty slow.

Vidad said...

Can't get it set up. Link doesn't work - and I'm not seeing it elsewhere.

My Skype account is:

saintdavidthegood

Nate said...

try the link again

Nate said...

I hate blogtalk radio sometimes

Nate said...

ok guys..

http://my.blogtalkradio.com/host/premium.aspx?type=listener

Try that link

Anonymous said...

Jamie R, eh? Cool.

A: Willet Bourbon

T: Extraordinary Larry by Drew

F: Smith 642 airweight 38

toothy

Russ said...

A: My Dad's homebrew mead. Yes, we're descended from vikings.

T: Highland pipe tobacco. Despite the pipe bite, it's pretty good.

F: AK. AK. AK.

Bulleit Rye? Is that as amazing as it sounds?

Vidad said...

I can't get it set up to Skype, though apparently I now have my own gardening show.

Better call me again. Or I can call you.

mmaier2112 said...

A: probably going to stick with a little MM

T: none... dammit.

F: my usual Taurus PT145 ... almost bought my first rifle today though. I might just go back and get it.

Where's NATE? Dead air sucks.

Nate said...

blogtalk sucks giant balls.

nordicthunder said...

wow ! I cannot believe Jamie is not understanding the basic concept of defending oneself, weather it be against an ill willed individual or a collection of ill willed individuals (read govt) serious ass denial that one. even after admitting that Sydney (iirc) is having huge crime issues ?! unbelievable

A:Yuengling
T:Camels
F:S&W MP40

nordicthunder said...

cripes sake Jamie ! King George III wasn't a psycho ? the US werent colonies ?

best show yet guys !

mmaier2112 said...

AND another show in the books.

Thanks guys.

Jamie-R said...

I wouldn't even call Henry VIII a psycho, just a misguided vain man. Calling Brits psychos is a stretch. I'll call the French psychos, but not them.

Vidad said...

I think you got the race thing right, Jamie. There's a problem here. The gov't has tried to prop up and pay off the former slaves, leading to a permanent underclass of people that think they're owed a free ride and that whitey is racist... so they hate him back. And go wilding their way through state fairs, etc.

Nate said...

Six.... shutup.

Outlaw X said...

Sorry couldn't understand Jamie's thick accent. It was a one sided debate. But let them give away their firearms, don't give a damn. They are Aussies and don't care.

Outlaw X said...

here is a link, Nate.

http://blog.nraoutdoors.com/outfitter-updates/helicopter-hogs-hunts/

Outlaw X said...

Vidad gets the funniest comment award. "2/3's have belts 1/3 does not.

Nate said...

JAC's "self selecting population of bootlickers" was the winner of the night in my opinion.

Vidad said...

@Nate

No man. You're right on guns, but you seem a bit naive on race.

Nate said...

how am I naive? because I think its dumb to simply assert that all crime relates to blacks?

Nate said...

No doubt the murder rate in places like Dodge City was higher than modern New York because... ...

BECAUSE ALL THOSE BLACK PEOPLE WERE THERE!!!


/facepalm

Susan said...

I believe that what Vidad is referring to is the beginning of the welfare state in the 1960's. Nate, not just a race thing.

LBJ did much to foster the entitlement mentality until Affirmative Action came along and cemented it in the black community conscience. LBJ has even been quoted as saying something to the effect that the dems now own the black vote for the next 200 years.

And now when we try to dial back the expensive welfare state in any way, you can witness the hysteria from the libs. In their minds,we are trying to mess with their voter base and they don't like it one bit.

Honestly Nate, it isn't always about race. At least not in the way you took Vidad's comment.

Susan said...

Nordic,

George III was found to have suffered from porphyria(sp?). That disease can mimic symptoms of crazy. I think it even makes you pee blue. Dr. Who could probably explain it better than I could.

Nate, a curious question. Why has Vidad earned the nickname Six?

Vidad said...

"I think its dumb to simply assert that all crime relates to blacks?"

Who claimed all crime relates to blacks?

I think you like to fight for fighting's sake.

But, for the most part, in modern America you can judge the crime rate pretty accurately via demographic analysis. WHY this is the case is debateable, IF it's the case is not.

Yeah... I've been in crummy white neighborhoods... but the overwhelming experiences I've had with Miami, Nashville, Memphis, etc. etc. etc. is that the black neighborhood is the worst part of town. And if you move the black people, the crime comes with them.

Outlaw X said...

"JAC's "self selecting population of bootlickers" was the winner of the night in my opinion"

Yeah Nate that was damn funny as well. Just something about belt comment hit my funny bone. I expect as much fro JAC he is always funny in short succinct thoughts. Vidad just painted a picture in my mind.

Unknown said...

Seems like JamieR's argument is self-defeating.

If the Australians are so darn laid-back and law abiding, then what exactly is the objection to letting them have guns?

If, on the other hand, the only thing keeping Aussies from massacring each other in a red wedding style orgy of violence is a lack of hardware, then shouldn't JamieR arm himself?

It seems like he is saying that gun control works - but only when it isn't needed.

Jamie-R said...

It's never been needed in Australia, we've, unlike America, had a better level of trust in colonial forces as protectors from Abos, and never needed to be overly individualistic, it was only out of necessity - farmers needed them for critters, and sometimes Abos. The city dwellers didn't demand them because they didn't need them, since militias and regular forces of the Brits did a great job.

Somewhere along the timeframe, prob independence from Britain, America got it stuck in their head that freedom came from guns and that you couldn't trust government at all, we didn't, it was more relying on everyone or we'd die. We never developed a deep-seated paranoia about our governing authorities for no reason, and one can say, being Australian, that America's reaction to taxation and representation was overboard considering how much they took from Britain culturally and intellectually, it was like an ungrateful slap in the face. And so its been ever since.

Oh and I'm sure you haven't heard of the Aussie Christopher Lane in Duncan, Oklahoma, but everyone here has - about 6 hours later I was debating with Nate on guns. Trust me, we just shake our heads when teenagers can get such simple access to firearms, those boys were not exactly constitutional scholars looking to defend from government, they just wanted to shoot people.

I defend the right of yours to live in such a society, but it's not happening here!

Outlaw X said...

"I defend the right of yours to live in such a society, but it's not happening here!"

There is a past present and future. We should understand the past but most don't. We should understand the present but most don't. We should anticipate the future but most don't.

Although I don't use a fire extinguisher every day and don't need one right now, being a volunteer fireman in the past I see a reason for them in the future. Therefore I own two fire extinguishers. You see no need for guns now but because you don't need them now do you as well not own fire extinguishers?

jmyron said...

If restrictions on guns have never been needed in Australia, then what is the justification for them?

As to America: American's don't believe that freedom comes from guns - what we do believe is that Power comes from guns. I'm sure you will agree that this is not an unreasonable belief.

Given our experience with the British colonial government, our belief in the untrustworthiness of government is likewise perfectly justified. Our founding fathers would have happily remained British citizens had they been afforded the rights and privileges due to them as citizens. Since that was not the case, can your really blame them for not wanting to be second class subjects of a third rate empire run by a mad German?

Just because we think and act like Britons doesn't mean we should be ruled by Britons. It means we should be ruled as if we were Britons - we were not.

Maybe you got a better deal from your masters, but I doubt you would have had America not taken the stand it did.

Furthermore, Outlaw X is spot on. An armed populace is the last fail-safe against tyranny. A fail-safe that isn't maintained when it isn't needed won't be there when it is.

Jamie-R said...

If restrictions on guns have never been needed in Australia, then what is the justification for them?

Mass killings, our last one was in 1996, been none since laws to crack down on assault rifles and the like. But historically we've had about a 5% ownership of guns, which is the flipside to the US.

The problem the US has is that it divorced itself from the history that led to its formation, it's no longer a British nation, and although Britain has its ups and downs, I reckon it will still be there in 500 years. Can't say the same for the USA.

I fear the day we become a republic too, the traditionalists here know how important that Union Jack on our flag is, and do not want the excesses of trying to maintain a republic.

jmyron said...

Mass killings, our last one was in 1996, been none since laws to crack down on assault rifles and the like.

Completely false, you have had a no fewer than four mass murder incidents since 1996 - including a mass shooting at one of your universities.

The only thing your gun ban seems to have accomplished is to change the means of mass murder. Yes, guns can be used to kill lots of people, but then again, so can gasoline or common household cleaning products. You shouldn't ban gasoline, and you shouldn't ban guns for exactly the same reasons.