2 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

“The only people I know that have no problems are people I don’t know well.”

 

everybody has problems, it is the importance that you give to them that determines whether you inhabit a world of problems or not, accepting that it is as it is brings peace, that is my experience.

... or as one philosopher out it: Ride with the tide and flow with the go.

Or like our first Republican President said: “Most people are as happy as they make their minds up to be”

The UK does not have a huge heroin problem.  The drug of choice is cocaine, ecstasy and Ganga. The UK also has a free at the point of service health care system, welfare payments and as in most countries, young people do not own homes. .They live with their parents. There is also rule of law with a police force who though incompetent and complacent  are not extremely corrupt. However, I believe there are problems in the UK, immigration,  The growth of Islam, The time wasting drug laws, the dominance of PC culture, extreme left wing feminism,  diversity leading to division, too many taxes unprecedented levels of extreme street violence, dismal night life, high prices and awful weather. I live in Pattaya but return to the UK two months a year. The cities are becoming worse and worse. When they start to improve the hard left organises anti gentrification campaigns to drive out new innovative people. The UK and Europe is lost. 
 

How could they have extreme street violence if there are no guns?

... or as Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) put it in Casablanca: 

 

"Well everybody in Casablanca has problems. Yours may work out."

5 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

How could they have extreme street violence if there are no guns?

 

knives, acid, iron bars, molotov cocktails, even the most mentally retarded are very inventif when it comes to violence.

2 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Not for you or me for sure.

But, depends on the reason for them.

I do know some guys that have lived a very hectic life maybe in a big city and someway, living on a farm seems appealing.  Having land with animals/crops to take care of.

Then there are the ones who are talked into it by their gf or wives.  They want to be close to family, etc. and the girls convince them to make the move.

Then there are those that may be running from something.  Who knows why, but they want to generally be away from people. 

 

I actually think it is more of the second one.  TG influenced life.

 

But if people are happy then God bless them and please try to enjoy a good life.

"I do know some guys that have lived a very hectic life maybe in a big city and someway, living on a farm seems appealing. Having land with animals/crops to take care of." 

 

Has failure written all over it. What they need is a hobby farm or a house with a big yard for veggie patch chickens ducks  rabbits etc. I grew up in one and it was great but living in a village? I stayed at my grandfather's remote village in the mountains of Bosnia and loved it but on day 10  

I was making excuses to get the hell out lol

5 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

... or as Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) put it in Casablanca: 

 

"Well everybody in Casablanca has problems. Yours may work out."

problems always end one way or another,  past disasters are for the most part distant memories. 

1 hour ago, smotherb said:

I like having guns.

I think that is the point. You like guns. That is the main reason, any other reason is an afterthought as some people don't consider that a legitimate reason. I do consider it a reason if the gun is used legitimately for sport and locked away at all other times. All the rest will keep going in circles as the we see the science differently. I am looking at how the majority of people's bodies react to these types of situations (as the police hit rate stats/professional trainers view of those stats prove). Not to mention the planning, timing, layout of most houses in Thailand that would be hit by a home invasion. Unless personal, the only homes vulnerable are those without any deterrent (high fence, wall, dogs etc). Those vulnerable homes, a gun is utterly useless to someone if a home invasion occurs whilst they are in the shower for example, listening to music, or any other activity that makes noise/distraction, as no warning. Or simply if the intruders learn the routine of the person (as they often do even to steal fruit in Thailand). 

Like people have said, if someone needs a gun in the area they live it is better just to move. I could only ever see needing a gun in places where there are killings daily to weekly. Even my Mrs didn't feel the need to have a gun when walking around in a government uniform (prime target) in the insurgency down South where there are weekly killings. I am glad we finally got to the 'I like guns' though. 

56 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

 

Well, now. Are you inferring I am lying or that I am some sort of teenager trying to impress you all?   I've had that land since 1978; always wanted a piece of the rock, so I bought it with my Iran monies. The best investment I ever made. It paid for itself, its taxes, and its improvements--the cabin, the well, the pond and the gates and roads--years ago from the gas options, pipeline fees, and timber I take every ten years. It will go to my son, then grandson. It's the gift that keeps on giving. I have told you; I plan for what I want and usually get it--education, career, a good woman, financial security, my piece of the rock, etc. ad infinitim.   

This reminds me.

What is it:

Issan

Isaan

Isarn

Essan

Esaan

etc.

 

I can go on and on seen it many ways.

 

What is the correct spelling of this place?

Thanks

1 minute ago, smotherb said:

Well, now. Are you inferring I am lying or that I am some sort of teenager trying to impress you all? <snip>It's the gift that keeps on giving. I have told you; I plan for what I want and usually get it--education, career, a good woman, financial security, my piece of the rock, .etc. ad infinitim.   

I inferred nothing -- you did. Anyway I implied nothing. Just thought it might have been something  your Grandpappy might have said: With a bear it's either you or him. 

I think that is the point. You like guns. That is the main reason, any other reason is an afterthought as some people don't consider that a legitimate reason. I do consider it a reason if the gun is used legitimately for sport and locked away at all other times. All the rest will keep going in circles as the we see the science differently. I am looking at how the majority of people's bodies react to these types of situations (as the police hit rate stats/professional trainers view of those stats prove). Not to mention the planning, timing, layout of most houses in Thailand that would be hit by a home invasion. Unless personal, the only homes vulnerable are those without any deterrent (high fence, wall, dogs etc). Those vulnerable homes, a gun is utterly useless to someone if a home invasion occurs whilst they are in the shower for example, listening to music, or any other activity that makes noise/distraction, as no warning. Or simply if the intruders learn the routine of the person (as they often do even to steal fruit in Thailand). 

 

Like people have said, if someone needs a gun in the area they live it is better just to move. I could only ever see needing a gun in places where there are killings daily to weekly. Even my Mrs didn't feel the need to have a gun when walking around in a government uniform (prime target) in the insurgency down South where there are weekly killings. I am glad we finally got to the 'I like guns' though. 

 

What’s wrong with having something because you like it?

 

Why is it okay to take something I like away because you don’t like it?

 

If someone feels safer and sleeps better at night because they have a weapon, why should it be taken from them?

24 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

I inferred nothing -- you did. Anyway I implied nothing. Just thought it might have been something  your Grandpappy might have said: With a bear it's either you or him. 

How did I infer anything? I asked if you did.

How did I infer anything? I asked if you did.

You inferred he implied

39 minutes ago, wildewillie89 said:

I think that is the point. You like guns. That is the main reason, any other reason is an afterthought as some people don't consider that a legitimate reason. I do consider it a reason if the gun is used legitimately for sport and locked away at all other times. All the rest will keep going in circles as the we see the science differently. I am looking at how the majority of people's bodies react to these types of situations (as the police hit rate stats/professional trainers view of those stats prove). Not to mention the planning, timing, layout of most houses in Thailand that would be hit by a home invasion. Unless personal, the only homes vulnerable are those without any deterrent (high fence, wall, dogs etc). Those vulnerable homes, a gun is utterly useless to someone if a home invasion occurs whilst they are in the shower for example, listening to music, or any other activity that makes noise/distraction, as no warning. Or simply if the intruders learn the routine of the person (as they often do even to steal fruit in Thailand). 

Like people have said, if someone needs a gun in the area they live it is better just to move. I could only ever see needing a gun in places where there are killings daily to weekly. Even my Mrs didn't feel the need to have a gun when walking around in a government uniform (prime target) in the insurgency down South where there are weekly killings. I am glad we finally got to the 'I like guns' though. 

We could have gotten here in a lot fewer words. Of course I like guns, most gun owners do.

An infer vs. imply grammar lesson shouldn't be necessary for those who got a great education. However, it is always fascinating to hear front the guy what is life at the top of the food chain.

Edited June 14, 20188 yr by JLCrab

6 minutes ago, mogandave said:

You inferred he implied

Yes, you are correct. I should have asked if he were implying. However, I asked.

@TheManic

 

Yes, mate you're right about everything.

 

Except you're not.

 

So, let's agree to disagree, & not get into pointless discussion.

This reminds me.
What is it:
Issan
Isaan
Isarn
Essan
Esaan
etc.
 
I can go on and on seen it many ways.
 
What is the correct spelling of this place?
Thanks

The wife is (from Issaan)
However, also says that all of those would be acceptable & still doesnt know why there are so many variables [emoji53]

Sent from my X9079 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

The wife is (from Issaan)
However, also says that all of those would be acceptable & still doesnt know why there are so many variables [emoji53]

Sent from my X9079 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Are you guys talking about upcountry?

Are you guys talking about upcountry?

Well, I am talking up as in Udon Thani way!

Sent from my X9079 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

22 hours ago, JLCrab said:

So ThaiVisa provides a wonderful public service for you as you now get to tell the membership at large how happy you are.

your grapes are sour. It's better than being able to spout out how awful everything is.

I like hard boiled eggs with salt and Pepper

I eat my peas with honey

I've done it all my life

It makes the peas taste funny

But it keeps them on the knife

“Here’s to swimmin’ with bow-legged women”

 Married now for close to ten years and the wife's English is close to fluent but I remember when she was studying for her Citizenship test and had a question and answer recording that she played over and over to memorise the answers.

Some of the questions were:

Q: who is the governor of your state? 

Ans: answers will vary (because each state has a different Governor)

Q: who is your senator?

Ans : answer willvary. (cause different senators)

 So the wife looked at me and said, "Boy this Ansi wilavry must be a very important person to be both Governor and Senator!

LOL

We still laugh over that, 

Edited June 15, 20188 yr by sirineou

18 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

What’s wrong with having something because you like it?

 

Why is it okay to take something I like away because you don’t like it?

 

If someone feels safer and sleeps better at night because they have a weapon, why should it be taken from them?

I literally said liking guns (i.e. using them for sport), is a legitimate reason to own a gun. I never said I did not like guns either. I do like guns, I have been to ranges and I do see a use for them for certain rural jobs (e.g. farming) or people who participate in sport.

However, only those I would consider legitimate reasons of having a gun, not this notion of it will save my life. The use of them in a real life situation is ridiculous as the police stats and common sense shows. Those are stats where the gun is actually on the person, the situation generally has been in action for a while (not a total surprise) and the gun is ready to be discharged. A home invasion is the complete opposite of that, so a 18% (or 43%) hit rare will be significantly lower.  All these variables was why arming teachers was found to be such a ridiculous idea. For the rest of the arguments, people have been watching too many movies rather than actually experiencing/training for real life scenarios. 

No one would have issues with guns if people just said from the beginning 'I like guns'. If people locked their guns, went to the range, went home and locked them again. Absolutely no problems from anyone. It is when they think they have the capabilities of elite soldiers due to the fact they own a gun that people have problems. Why? As they are more likely to hit a neighbour than the person they are actually attempting to fire at, due to the hit rate being so low. 

I literally said liking guns (i.e. using them for sport), is a legitimate reason to own a gun. I never said I did not like guns either. I do like guns, I have been to ranges and I do see a use for them for certain rural jobs (e.g. farming) or people who participate in sport.

However, only those I would consider legitimate reasons of having a gun, not this notion of it will save my life. The use of them in a real life situation is ridiculous as the police stats and common sense shows. Those are stats where the gun is actually on the person, the situation generally has been in action for a while (not a total surprise) and the gun is ready to be discharged. A home invasion is the complete opposite of that, so a 18% (or 43%) hit rare will be significantly lower.  All these variables was why arming teachers was found to be such a ridiculous idea. For the rest of the arguments, people have been watching too many movies rather than actually experiencing/training for real life scenarios. 

No one would have issues with guns if people just said from the beginning 'I like guns'. If people locked their guns, went to the range, went home and locked them again. Absolutely no problems from anyone. It is when they think they have the capabilities of elite soldiers due to the fact they own a gun that people have problems. Why? As they are more likely to hit a neighbour than the person they are actually attempting to fire at, due to the hit rate being so low. 

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood.

To be clear, you agree that most anyone that wants a gun should be able to own one.

Apparently we agree.

4 hours ago, soalbundy said:

 

 

 

4 hours ago, soalbundy said:

On 6/14/2018 at 9:03 AM, JLCrab said:

So ThaiVisa provides a wonderful public service for you as you now get to tell the membership at large how happy you are.

your grapes are sour. It's better than being able to spout out how awful everything is.

I have no grapes. But if you think your spouting makes the world a better place, then spout away.