Re: Gun Control
 

The mention of David Icke, is quite enough for me thank you:rolleyes:

Re: Gun Control
 

The fact that we do have these gun laws which are ineffective, with the criminal element, is bad enough, criminals have never played by the rules and were never going to comply with the hand gun legislation when it was introduced, the only people it did effect was the genuine sportsman

Re: Gun Control
 

What has it got to do with us ? It's an American problem & it's down to their constitution the 2nd amendment, "the right to keep & bear arms" it's been around since Dec 15 1791.

Now unless the Americans change their constitution & then face down the NRA, which I very much doubt because of the weight & influence that they can bring to bear. No politico if he/she intends to stay in the game for any length of time would even contemplate these changes & challenges.

The UK has got some of the toughest gun laws & punishments possible & it still can't control the criminal gun users. So instead, Plod & the powers that be have relentlessly pursued the legal possessors, then having been raked over the coals & stultified by over regulation most tend to lose interest & give up.

Re: Gun Control
 

Sensible as always Dave - and summed up in eight words...

Re: Gun Control
 

[quote=MargaretR;1004316 but his method of mapping ears has convinced me that SOME of what he reveals is true.[/quote]That has given me the best laugh I've had all day...

Re: Gun Control
 

That Second Amendment really has the yanks messed up, although I doubt that many of them have read it, especially the first bit: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ....".

There are just too many of us living on this planet. And in the large cities in the West, they are living too close together .... with too much poverty and too little opportunity. And, esp. in the land of the Glock, with too many guns readily available. It amuses me that in a country with a problem with road rage, many folks can legally have a hand gun in the glove compartment. No wonder they have bumper stickers in California saying: "Cover me, I'm changing lanes":rolleyes: Obviously, we have problems facing us which can't easily be solved. But, some attempt at controling the sale of firearms can't hurt. But nothing will stop nut bars from showing up in places like Aurora and Dunblane, armed to the teeth, just looking for folks to kill.

Just crossed my mind that the US is only marginally safer than Syria right now:eek:;)

Re: Gun Control
 

Perhaps your subscription to the New Scientist has lapsed.:rolleyes:

Sign in to read: Ear recognition may beat face biometrics - tech - 23 July 2005 - New Scientist
" Ear recognition may beat face biometrics
EAR-shape analysis could be better than face recognition at automatically identifying people.
Mark Nixon, a biometrics expert at the University of Southampton, UK, has developed a technique to capture the shape of an ear and represent it in code. Unlike faces, ears do not change shape over time.
In an initial study using pictures of the ears of 63 people, Nixon and his colleague David Hurley found their method to be 99.2 per cent accurate. Nixon thinks this could be improved.
The technique could be used to identify people from CCTV footage, or incorporated into mobile phones to identify the caller, says Nixon. The study is due to be published in the journal Computer Vision and Image Understanding".

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...67865511003400
Ears have rich structural features that are almost invariant with increasing age and facial expression variations. Therefore ear recognition has become an effective and appealing approach to non-contact biometric recognition.

Re: Gun Control
 

Sorry Margaret - I'm quite happy to go along with this as a valid technique. What made me laugh was the thought of Icke and Branson having their ears compared. From your previous post I though it was the guy who came up with the videos who was responsible for the ear-matching technique, rather than the scientists you have just cited.

Re: Gun Control
 

Apology accepted - sometimes you like to be treated as our scientific wizz kid - nice of you admit that you are fallible.

I hope I spelt that right:rolleyes:

Re: Gun Control
 

Hope so, I'm only human. A very gracious post, thanks.

Re: Gun Control
 

So what you saying? Branson is actually David Icke and they are one and the same carrying out two seperate existences. I don't think so really don't.

Re: Gun Control
 

Neither do I.:)
If you look at more of his videos, the convincing ones are where he shows the same actors appearing at different media news events across USA.
Which verifies the theory that many news events are 'staged'.

Re: Gun Control
 

Mmm the video you first posted I looked at it and I didn't see the same similarity that this guy claimed! and to be honest I don't have the time to get all the video's and check the ears and decide if he is right! I just think it's too far fetched that all these news events are staged and contain the same people repeatedly. I just think it could lead someone to mental illness to keep believing that everything on the news is lies and made up of actors put there by some "secret organisation" who are doing this.

Some conspiracy people of extreme nature are saying that this latest shooting never actually happened! To say that in my view is total bonkers...

Re: Gun Control
 

Some news is staged and, in that video you posted, the senate enquiry interrogation showed that to be an admitted fact.

It is called 'propaganda'.

You don't recognise it to be so if you cannot think of the reason for them doing it.

Just because you don't know a reason, doesn't mean that one wont eventually dawn on you.

Re: Gun Control
 

First off Margaret - he says this woman Lisa Fithian is this other woman a lawyer called Judith Clark - they look nothing like each other - I think the guys off his rocker. He then goes on to say she is a third person as well who looks totally different. I think he's wrong.