 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / April 2007Virginia Tech Memorial Photos
Hello to all fellow photo NG contributors, Everyone has something to say about this tragedy, but eventually, words begin to all run together until they lose some of their meaning. Sometimes a photo can express a thought or sentiment far more clearly, so this is my initial contribution, and I hope you'll share yours (read below): Direct Gallery Link (just starting out): http://www.pbase.com/markuson/virginia_tech_memorial First few photos: http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/77343740/original http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/77343743/original http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/77343744/original http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/77343746/original These will not all be my photos, but photos by others as well. Three of these shots were taken by my dad. **If you have an appropriate photo you'd like posted here, send a reduced version (about 800 pixels in the long dimension or so, about 100-200kb) to the e-mail address noted in the gallery description, and I'll do my best to post it. Here's another version of my e-mail: mjmorgan(the number TWO)at cox.net. They don't have to be perfect photos, or even close to perfect. -Maybe just an you think fits in some way, however minor. Please name the file using your first name and I'll leave that under each photo. Or...if you don't want your name there, name it something else. Just send something. You never know what impact little things may have, so give it a go... Take care, and I hope to hear from you. -Mark  SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > Hello to all fellow photo NG contributors, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > is my > initial contribution, and I hope you'll share yours (read below): I would prefer to see pictures depicting gunmen loading their weapons with coffin shaped bullets, perhaps then the reality of this needless slaughter will hit home, and the people of USA will do something to cut down on the amount of guns readily available to anyone who wants one. >> Hello to all fellow photo NG contributors, >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > will hit home, and the people of USA will do something to cut down on the > amount of guns readily available to anyone who wants one. Canada has very similar levels of gun ownership to the USA but much lower levels of homicide by gunfire. As has already been said, "Guns don't kill people, prevailing culture kills people" >>> Hello to all fellow photo NG contributors, >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > lower levels of homicide by gunfire. As has already been said, "Guns > don't kill people, Of course guns kill people, ask yourself how many of those that died at Virginia Tech would still be alive if the murderer had been armed with a knife instead of a gun, then deduct that amount from the total dead, this should give you an approximation of how many that gun killed, as opposed to if the killer had been armed with a knife. > Of course guns kill people, ask yourself how many of those that died at > Virginia Tech would still be alive if the murderer had been armed with a > knife instead of a gun, then deduct that amount from the total dead, > this should give you an approximation of how many that gun killed, as > opposed to if the killer had been armed with a knife. The UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world - since the handgun ban in 1997, gun crime committed with *handguns* has tripled. Spotted any flaw in that ? SignatureNeil Barker >> Of course guns kill people, ask yourself how many of those that died >> at [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Spotted any flaw in that ? Yes, without the handgun ban, it would have probably gone up ten fold, so possibly a 70% reduction in real terms. > > The UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world - since > > the handgun ban in 1997, gun crime committed with *handguns* has [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Yes, without the handgun ban, it would have probably gone up ten fold, > so possibly a 70% reduction in real terms. How many of the crimes committed with firearms do you think are committed with legally held guns ? Do you know what the firearms homicide rate per 100,000 population in the UK is ? These are rhetorical questions, BTW.... SignatureNeil Barker >> > The UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world - >> > since [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > How many of the crimes committed with firearms do you think are > committed with legally held guns ? And your point is? > Do you know what the firearms homicide rate per 100,000 population in > the UK is ? > > These are rhetorical questions, BTW.... Well I think the last one deserves an answer. For England and Wales, about 0.1 of a person per 100,000, or just over 1 person per million, now how does this compare with wild west America? Let me help you out, America has approximately 5 times the population of the UK, but the number of people killed by guns is approximately 157 times the number killed in the UK. Considering these facts, which country do you think it is safer to live in, the one with strict gun controls, or the one where guns seem to come free in cornflakes packets? > > How many of the crimes committed with firearms do you think are > > committed with legally held guns ? > > And your point is? That your ridiculous statement earlier, "Yes, without the handgun ban, it would have probably gone up ten fold, so possibly a 70% reduction in real terms." is totally fatuous, but you know that really. It's a simple fact that putting further controls on legally held firearms is not the answer to gun crime - all but a tiny minority of gun crime is committed with illegally held firearms. In fact, as legal ownership of handguns has been banned since 1997, *all* handgun crime is therefore committed with illegally held firearms - note how it is increasing too. > > Do you know what the firearms homicide rate per 100,000 population in > > the UK is ? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > For England and Wales, about 0.1 of a person per 100,000, or just over 1 > person per million Correct - significantly low, wouldn't you say ? > now how does this compare with wild west America? Who mentioned America ? Not me. > Let me help you out, America has approximately 5 times the population of > the UK, but the number of people killed by guns is approximately 157 > times the number killed in the UK. Considering these facts, which > country do you think it is safer to live in, the one with strict gun > controls, or the one where guns seem to come free in cornflakes packets? Now go and do some more research as to the percentage of guns held per head in Canada and what their rate of gun crime is. Have fun. SignatureNeil Barker > Who mentioned America ? Not me. The subject of this thread might give you a clue. > > Who mentioned America ? Not me. > > > The subject of this thread might give you a clue. I note that you have ignored all my other points, which I take as a clear sign that you now agree with them. Well done. I knew you'd get there in the end. SignatureNeil Barker >> > Who mentioned America ? Not me. >> > >> The subject of this thread might give you a clue. > > I note that you have ignored all my other points, > Well done. That reads much better. > > I note that you have ignored all my other points, > > Well done. > > That reads much better. Bit of a prat really, aren't you "Harry" ? Beats me why I'm attempting to discuss such issues with the intellectually bereft, like yourself. SignatureNeil Barker >> > I note that you have ignored all my other points, >> > Well done. >> >> That reads much better. > > Bit of a prat really, aren't you "Harry" ? A quick search of Google Groups using Neil Barker as the search criteria shows up who the real prat appears to be, you seem to have attracted your fair share of stalkers for some reason, why is this? > > Bit of a prat really, aren't you "Harry" ? > > A quick search of Google Groups using Neil Barker as the search criteria > shows up who the real prat appears to be, you seem to have attracted > your fair share of stalkers for some reason, why is this? Sheer popularity. You need to be careful before encouraging me to go looking for "Harry Stottle", too - you do seem to be an argumentative prat, don't you ? Now don't forget to reply to the points put to you, rather than inserting your head into the ground. Again. Or of course, you can run away. Again. SignatureNeil Barker >> > Bit of a prat really, aren't you "Harry" ? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You need to be careful before encouraging me to go looking for "Harry > Stottle", too - you do seem to be an argumentative prat, don't you ? Only against self opinionated egotists who contradict themselves in arguments, ring any bells? ("Harry's" crap snipped) Still avoiding my questions eh, loser ? That seems to be what you do, having looked at your drivel. SignatureNeil Barker snip...................................................................... > prevailing culture kills people" Amen. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.