Conspiracy Theories
What's your favourite one that you almost believe? And why? We're popping on our tinfoil hats and very much looking forward to your answers. (Thanks to Shezam for this suggestion.)
( , Thu 1 Dec 2011, 13:47)
What's your favourite one that you almost believe? And why? We're popping on our tinfoil hats and very much looking forward to your answers. (Thanks to Shezam for this suggestion.)
( , Thu 1 Dec 2011, 13:47)
« Go Back
Light and Retire
Once upon a time in a land far, far away I used to shoot competition pistol. This was years after the UK ban on most weapons following the Dunblane massacre, and we used to get regular visits from the GB squad who couldn’t practice at home. The advantage for us was that in return we got free sessions with the Olympic coaches. Over a few months I got to know on , a huge and softly spoken man we shall call Bob who was an ex-medallist and now helped coach the team. One day we got talking about the gun ban and Bob was remarkably philosophical about it – I was examining the logic of the ban, but he was of the view that the whole thing was a conspiracy, so logical rules didn’t follow. He gave me a short reading list, and from then onwards the matter was closed.
The funny thing is that this particular conspiracy theory comes mostly from the pages of the Cullen Enquiry but the truth is too unpalatable for the victims’ families to face. I’ve often wondered why nobody ever took the controversial step of telling the real story, but while researching this to get my facts right it turns out that somebody did in 2006 – ‘Dunblane Unburied.’ By Sandra Uttley.
I’m not going to ask you to read the report or book, so here’s the gist of it. Guns were banned because of the massacre. They shouldn’t have been; it was a knee jerk reaction – Hamilton (the one who murdered 16 children and an adult) held a gun license, but the at each review the local police had repeatedly requested it be withdrawn. They had been overruled by a senior police officer in each case. The Cullen report reveals that the same senior officer (who retired on grounds of ill health shortly later) would regularly get dropped off for the night at Hamilton’s house by his police driver.
It gets murkier. Hamilton was undoubtedly a paedophile (draw your own conclusions about what he and the copper did on those evenings). However it is unlikely that he ever laid hands on a child – this would surely have come out in the muck-raking. He was a scout master until his warrant was withdrawn for no particular reason, then ran youth groups (Andy Murray went to one). Parents started getting increasingly suspicious. They boycotted his shop, which failed. The council banned him from using their premises without due process. In short he was ostracised for, in his view, nothing, and more importantly without any evidence of wrongdoing. I think Hamilton simply cracked – he tried defending his position by writing letters to everybody, but his appeals were never addressed; in other words he was found guilty without a trial. Everything he loved was being taken away from him and he decided to strike back at the parents in the most horrible way he could. This was a failure of due process, but I’ve often wondered how much guilt the parents feel, because in the cold hard light of day here was a maladjusted individual who had been pushed over the edge by the actions of those same parents. His reactions can’t be condoned, but given the guns in his possession surely somebody should have thought about the ramifications?
This matter became a hugely touchy subject, particularly for the parents themselves. The gun controls were rushed though even though the checks and controls hadn’t failed, (that’s the conspiracy bit) and there’s never been an enquiry into of the Central Scottish Police or the actions of that senior ploice officer.
The Wikipedia page for Dunblane has a history section that fails to even mention the massacre (it’s in the ‘schools’ section bizzarely)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 13:12, 27 replies)
Once upon a time in a land far, far away I used to shoot competition pistol. This was years after the UK ban on most weapons following the Dunblane massacre, and we used to get regular visits from the GB squad who couldn’t practice at home. The advantage for us was that in return we got free sessions with the Olympic coaches. Over a few months I got to know on , a huge and softly spoken man we shall call Bob who was an ex-medallist and now helped coach the team. One day we got talking about the gun ban and Bob was remarkably philosophical about it – I was examining the logic of the ban, but he was of the view that the whole thing was a conspiracy, so logical rules didn’t follow. He gave me a short reading list, and from then onwards the matter was closed.
The funny thing is that this particular conspiracy theory comes mostly from the pages of the Cullen Enquiry but the truth is too unpalatable for the victims’ families to face. I’ve often wondered why nobody ever took the controversial step of telling the real story, but while researching this to get my facts right it turns out that somebody did in 2006 – ‘Dunblane Unburied.’ By Sandra Uttley.
I’m not going to ask you to read the report or book, so here’s the gist of it. Guns were banned because of the massacre. They shouldn’t have been; it was a knee jerk reaction – Hamilton (the one who murdered 16 children and an adult) held a gun license, but the at each review the local police had repeatedly requested it be withdrawn. They had been overruled by a senior police officer in each case. The Cullen report reveals that the same senior officer (who retired on grounds of ill health shortly later) would regularly get dropped off for the night at Hamilton’s house by his police driver.
It gets murkier. Hamilton was undoubtedly a paedophile (draw your own conclusions about what he and the copper did on those evenings). However it is unlikely that he ever laid hands on a child – this would surely have come out in the muck-raking. He was a scout master until his warrant was withdrawn for no particular reason, then ran youth groups (Andy Murray went to one). Parents started getting increasingly suspicious. They boycotted his shop, which failed. The council banned him from using their premises without due process. In short he was ostracised for, in his view, nothing, and more importantly without any evidence of wrongdoing. I think Hamilton simply cracked – he tried defending his position by writing letters to everybody, but his appeals were never addressed; in other words he was found guilty without a trial. Everything he loved was being taken away from him and he decided to strike back at the parents in the most horrible way he could. This was a failure of due process, but I’ve often wondered how much guilt the parents feel, because in the cold hard light of day here was a maladjusted individual who had been pushed over the edge by the actions of those same parents. His reactions can’t be condoned, but given the guns in his possession surely somebody should have thought about the ramifications?
This matter became a hugely touchy subject, particularly for the parents themselves. The gun controls were rushed though even though the checks and controls hadn’t failed, (that’s the conspiracy bit) and there’s never been an enquiry into of the Central Scottish Police or the actions of that senior ploice officer.
The Wikipedia page for Dunblane has a history section that fails to even mention the massacre (it’s in the ‘schools’ section bizzarely)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 13:12, 27 replies)
Was this senior policeman
the one who belonged to the same Lodge as Hamilton? It's all a "Speculative Society" cover-up.
Hey, but at least Bliar got to ban handguns and since then no-one has been shot with one in the UK. (Apart from all the people who have been, erm, shot with handguns, of course)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 13:59, closed)
the one who belonged to the same Lodge as Hamilton? It's all a "Speculative Society" cover-up.
Hey, but at least Bliar got to ban handguns and since then no-one has been shot with one in the UK. (Apart from all the people who have been, erm, shot with handguns, of course)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 13:59, closed)
Indeed
It was extremely disappointing that the criminals didn't take the opportunity to hand theirs in too.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 14:08, closed)
It was extremely disappointing that the criminals didn't take the opportunity to hand theirs in too.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 14:08, closed)
it's almost as if making things illegal doesn't magically stop them happening
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 15:52, closed)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 15:52, closed)
"If you outlaw guns...
The only people with guns will be outlaws."
Pretty simple logic to me.
Look at the amount of people killed by cars and tobacco, but its fine to tax and regulate them.
You can create a crime-free society by regulating all of the following:
Weapons
Drugs
Sex
Rock & Roll (or just the media in general.)
But where would the fun be in that?
Incidentally, I'm not pro-gun. But I would like the right to carry a sword, it just looks classy.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:01, closed)
The only people with guns will be outlaws."
Pretty simple logic to me.
Look at the amount of people killed by cars and tobacco, but its fine to tax and regulate them.
You can create a crime-free society by regulating all of the following:
Weapons
Drugs
Sex
Rock & Roll (or just the media in general.)
But where would the fun be in that?
Incidentally, I'm not pro-gun. But I would like the right to carry a sword, it just looks classy.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:01, closed)
It's rather too simple, that's the problem.
Still, the law in this country before Dunblane seemed perfectly strict enough, and the laws that were brought in afterwards didn't seem to have any relevance to the case at all.
Personally I'd like a longbow.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:11, closed)
Still, the law in this country before Dunblane seemed perfectly strict enough, and the laws that were brought in afterwards didn't seem to have any relevance to the case at all.
Personally I'd like a longbow.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:11, closed)
I'm reading all these weapons as euphemisms for sexual organs.
Just saying like.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:57, closed)
Just saying like.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:57, closed)
I'd love the right to carry my sword.
Though admitedly I'd like a couple of guns too.
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 15:49, closed)
Though admitedly I'd like a couple of guns too.
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 15:49, closed)
You can, quite legally
Carry an ice axe down the street. Admittedly you have to be able to justify why, but still...
( , Mon 5 Dec 2011, 6:23, closed)
Carry an ice axe down the street. Admittedly you have to be able to justify why, but still...
( , Mon 5 Dec 2011, 6:23, closed)
I actually got away with strapping mine to the outside of my rucsack, which then went on a plane
and no one seemed that bothered about it.
Innocent days.
( , Mon 5 Dec 2011, 16:01, closed)
and no one seemed that bothered about it.
Innocent days.
( , Mon 5 Dec 2011, 16:01, closed)
at least we go rid of that scourge of British society, the Olympic shooting medallist though.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 15:25, closed)
Yeah, right on
The last thing we need is legitimate sportsmen demonstrating responsible gun-ownership to the youth of this country.
Nah, outlaw guns, kids won't be at all attracted to them after seeing them in every other film, rap video and X-box game, think they are cool and assume they know how to handle them properly. No, not at all.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 19:38, closed)
The last thing we need is legitimate sportsmen demonstrating responsible gun-ownership to the youth of this country.
Nah, outlaw guns, kids won't be at all attracted to them after seeing them in every other film, rap video and X-box game, think they are cool and assume they know how to handle them properly. No, not at all.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 19:38, closed)
Apparently that book
was funded by a shooter's group - who obviously would have had a bit of an agenda ie prove that gun ownership wasn't the problem.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:07, closed)
was funded by a shooter's group - who obviously would have had a bit of an agenda ie prove that gun ownership wasn't the problem.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:07, closed)
Of course gun ownership wasn't the problem.
The problem was that a nutjob killed a load of kids. You can do that with or without a legally-registered firearm, and let's be honest, anyone who's not deterred by the prospect of umpteen child murder convictions is hardly going to be put off by any firearms legislation you could possibly propose.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:15, closed)
The problem was that a nutjob killed a load of kids. You can do that with or without a legally-registered firearm, and let's be honest, anyone who's not deterred by the prospect of umpteen child murder convictions is hardly going to be put off by any firearms legislation you could possibly propose.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:15, closed)
By a similar token
somebody who is not deterred by the idea of murdering children is unlikely to be deterred by any legislation at all.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:58, closed)
somebody who is not deterred by the idea of murdering children is unlikely to be deterred by any legislation at all.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 16:58, closed)
oh I don't know,
if it were legal, I'd be tempted to take it up as a sport.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 17:06, closed)
if it were legal, I'd be tempted to take it up as a sport.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 17:06, closed)
It'd only be sport if the only permitted weapons were made out of parts of previous victims.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 17:28, closed)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 17:28, closed)
don't be silly, they'd be far to floppy and slippery to get a decent grouping.
( , Mon 5 Dec 2011, 11:30, closed)
Ive often wondered
what would have happened if Hamilton had gone in with a golf club (could easily kill a kid with a whack to the head)? Would Golf have been banned?
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 18:40, closed)
what would have happened if Hamilton had gone in with a golf club (could easily kill a kid with a whack to the head)? Would Golf have been banned?
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 18:40, closed)
It would be piss easy to mount the pavement in a 4x4 on a busy high street and kill a whole bunch of people.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 19:13, closed)
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 19:13, closed)
After the banning of most firearms here in Oz
I wondered what they would ban if I managed to kill several people with a pointy spoon handle. I'm quite sure that I could get at least half a dozen in fairly rapid succession, and the headlines would have to be hysterical.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 22:21, closed)
I wondered what they would ban if I managed to kill several people with a pointy spoon handle. I'm quite sure that I could get at least half a dozen in fairly rapid succession, and the headlines would have to be hysterical.
( , Sat 3 Dec 2011, 22:21, closed)
People will always kill people.
Sort of makes sense to me to make it a bit harder if we can.
Although frankly toddlers are asking for it, with their furtive weeing and provocative 'we are the future' stance.
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 17:18, closed)
Sort of makes sense to me to make it a bit harder if we can.
Although frankly toddlers are asking for it, with their furtive weeing and provocative 'we are the future' stance.
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 17:18, closed)
makes sense to me to take away the motive, rather than the means,
because there will always be a means. Where there's a will, there's a way, so the saying goes.
The ultimate logical conclusion is to have everyone chained to their beds and fed through tubes by machines...
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 17:24, closed)
because there will always be a means. Where there's a will, there's a way, so the saying goes.
The ultimate logical conclusion is to have everyone chained to their beds and fed through tubes by machines...
( , Sun 4 Dec 2011, 17:24, closed)
« Go Back