Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   So...more random shooting
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1054 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 21 of 63 (706810)
09-18-2013 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by vimesey
09-18-2013 4:36 AM


First against the wall come the revolution
You've prompted me to do a bit of rummaging around on the internet for the earliest known use of the phrase, but I've found nothing concrete. The earliest claimed use I've come across was someone on a forum saying that pretty much the same saying was used in German about Alfred Kerr in 1933, in the Nazi paper Voelkischer Beobachter. I've been unable to verify this.
A very similar expression, but without the 'up against the wall' formulation, can be found in the Evening Standard of Pennsylvania, from 8th July 1936:
quote:
Almost furled in the flying American flag at his side, he was hot gospeling doom for capitalism and religion from a soap box in Columbus Circle, the haven for discontents. His long hair in volcanic eruption, nostrils gloating, he was in fine furor. "A guy like that," twitched Bob Brinkerhoff, "will probably be the chief shootee, come the revolution."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by vimesey, posted 09-18-2013 4:36 AM vimesey has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1054 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 32 of 63 (713027)
12-09-2013 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Tangle
12-07-2013 8:05 AM


Gun laws are fairly liberal in this country, but if you want a licence to carry a gun around on the street with you for self-defence, one of the requirements is to demonstrate that you can hit a .25 square-metre target from 10 metres away four times out of five.
As Stalinist a restriction on freedom as this may be, I feel a little bit more comfortable knowing that anyone likely to start shooting away in a public place has a fair chance of hitting what they're aiming at. Kind of like how we make people demonstrate they can drive before turning them loose on the roads.
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Tangle, posted 12-07-2013 8:05 AM Tangle has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1054 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 35 of 63 (713235)
12-11-2013 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by ringo
12-10-2013 11:18 AM


You need to catch up on your history. In 1935 all "dependencies" on the British Parliament were removed by mutual agreement.
Not quite. The Statute of Westminster (in 1931, not 1935), removed most of Canada's dependence on the Westminster Parliament, but not all. The British Parliament still had the power to pass legislation on Canadian affairs at the request of the Canadian Parliament, and the Canadian Parliament did not have the right to amend its constitution without consent of the British Parliament. Canada attained full legislative independence only in 1982.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ringo, posted 12-10-2013 11:18 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024