Girl attacked by family gun

[B J Foster]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524

Should all guns be banned?

[Trevor Wilson]

On 1/25/2012 7:35 AM, B J Foster wrote:
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>
> Should all guns be banned?

**Nope.

Should all Fascist morons be banned from posting innanities to the Usenet?

YES!

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

[dechucka]

"B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:jfn4mp$5jd$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...

> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>
> Should all guns be banned?

I call for all dogs to be registered and certain types banned
altogether!!!!!!! Oh that is right these are occurring now.

When dogs are used in a massacre I will call for greater restrictions

[B J Foster]

On 25/01/2012 8:06 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 1/25/2012 7:35 AM, B J Foster wrote:
>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>
>> Should all guns be banned?
>
> **Nope.
>
> Should all Fascist morons be banned from posting innanities to the Usenet?
>
> YES!
>

Tosspot, first past the post - as usual. Whoosh!

[dechucka]

"Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:9o8kqn...@mid.individual.net...

> On 1/25/2012 7:35 AM, B J Foster wrote:
>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>
>> Should all guns be banned?
>
> **Nope.
>
> Should all Fascist morons be banned from posting innanities to the Usenet?
>
> YES!

bye bye Trevor enjoy your Usenet free life

[keithr]

On 25/01/2012 7:35 AM, B J Foster wrote:
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>
> Should all guns be banned?

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/water-claims-two-more-lives-after-mishaps-in-bay-20120124-1qfrd.html

Should the ocean be banned?

Stupid old git.

[dechucka]

"B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message

news:jfn84t$qbf$2...@bjf.motzarella.org...

> Tosspot, first past the post - as usual. Whoosh!\\


and your coming up the rear as normal

[B J Foster]

Ah, another anal idiot.

[B J Foster]

Who will pay the license fees, idiot?

Git yourself.

[B J Foster]

"The Humane Society estimates that there are 800,000 dog bites that
require medical attention every year. Dog bites rank second behind
sexually transmitted diseases as the most costly health problem in the
country. Over 60% of those bitten are children and 80% of the fatalities
are children".
http://leerburg.com/kidbites.htm

[keithr]

I see that your comprehension has not improved, try posting less and
reading more. If something is banned, there are no licence fees
involved, you simply cannot have it.

Like I said, stupid old git.

[dechucka]

"B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message

news:jfnbbi$dnm$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...

WOW, so what

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Drongos of a feather. ;-)

--
"If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop
for about a thousand years. "
-- Tim (it ain't a gonna rain no more) Flannery
- Australian Climate Commissar

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1-GdnSAMBtwqvoLS...@westnet.com.au...

So you only value multiple lives and couldn't care less about individuals.

That's socialists for you.

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
news:TYPTq.2125$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1-GdnSAMBtwqvoLS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:jfn4mp$5jd$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...
>>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>>
>>> Should all guns be banned?
>>
>> I call for all dogs to be registered and certain types banned
>> altogether!!!!!!! Oh that is right these are occurring now.
>>
>> When dogs are used in a massacre I will call for greater restrictions
>
> So you only value multiple lives and couldn't care less about individuals.
>
> That's socialists for you.

Any death or injury is a tragedy. However multiple deaths caused by a madman
using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill is a bit different from an
accidental bite. It takes less skill to pull a trigger than train a dog to
massacre people

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:pb-dnXEWNadCHr3S...@westnet.com.au...

>
> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
> news:TYPTq.2125$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1-GdnSAMBtwqvoLS...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:jfn4mp$5jd$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...
>>>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>>>
>>>> Should all guns be banned?
>>>
>>> I call for all dogs to be registered and certain types banned
>>> altogether!!!!!!! Oh that is right these are occurring now.
>>>
>>> When dogs are used in a massacre I will call for greater restrictions
>>
>> So you only value multiple lives and couldn't care less about
>> individuals.
>>
>> That's socialists for you.
>
> Any death or injury is a tragedy.

No, apparently not.

Only the mass ones register on the Leftard radar.

> However multiple deaths caused by a madman

Now you're starting to get it.

The problem is lunatics. THEY are what needs to be locked up.

Them and crims.

> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill

Spare us the Leftard disinformation.

If you fucks can't state a case without resorting to lies, you don't deserve
to be listened to.

> is a bit different from an accidental bite.

Dickhead, dogs don't bite accidentally. They do it on purpose.

One of the key differences between a living creature and an inanimate
object.

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:CF0Uq.2390$%E2...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:pb-dnXEWNadCHr3S...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>> news:TYPTq.2125$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1-GdnSAMBtwqvoLS...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:jfn4mp$5jd$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...
>>>>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>>>>
>>>>> Should all guns be banned?
>>>>
>>>> I call for all dogs to be registered and certain types banned
>>>> altogether!!!!!!! Oh that is right these are occurring now.
>>>>
>>>> When dogs are used in a massacre I will call for greater restrictions
>>>
>>> So you only value multiple lives and couldn't care less about
>>> individuals.
>>>
>>> That's socialists for you.
>>
>> Any death or injury is a tragedy.
>
> No, apparently not.

Sad attitude by you

>
> Only the mass ones register on the Leftard radar.
>
>> However multiple deaths caused by a madman
>
> Now you're starting to get it.
>
> The problem is lunatics. THEY are what needs to be locked up.
>
> Them and crims.

agree and also restrict there means of doing it. I'm at ease with the
current laws

>
>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>
> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.

any other purpose for guns?

>
> If you fucks can't state a case without resorting to lies, you don't
> deserve to be listened to.

getting all angry now are you?

>
>> is a bit different from an accidental bite.
>
> Dickhead, dogs don't bite accidentally. They do it on purpose.
>
> One of the key differences between a living creature and an inanimate
> object.

So you see no difference between a bite or an occasional tragic incident and
a massacre? Interesting

BTW I would tighten animal laws to make the owners more responsible for
injury or deaths.

[F Murtz]

that question is a bit silly.
There are loads of guns not designed to kill (although they will even if
you used them like a club)
If their only purpose was to kill they would not go to the extraordinary
lengths in design that target firearms do.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:B5mdnSXrHZn_K73S...@westnet.com.au...

>
> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
> news:CF0Uq.2390$%E2...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:pb-dnXEWNadCHr3S...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>>> news:TYPTq.2125$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>>>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:1-GdnSAMBtwqvoLS...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "B J Foster" <bjfo...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>> news:jfn4mp$5jd$1...@bjf.motzarella.org...
>>>>>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-25/girl-attacked-by-family-dog/3791524
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should all guns be banned?
>>>>>
>>>>> I call for all dogs to be registered and certain types banned
>>>>> altogether!!!!!!! Oh that is right these are occurring now.
>>>>>
>>>>> When dogs are used in a massacre I will call for greater restrictions
>>>>
>>>> So you only value multiple lives and couldn't care less about
>>>> individuals.
>>>>
>>>> That's socialists for you.
>>>
>>> Any death or injury is a tragedy.
>>
>> No, apparently not.
>
> Sad attitude by you

It's your attitude. Not mine.

Can't you read English?

>
>>
>> Only the mass ones register on the Leftard radar.
>>
>>> However multiple deaths caused by a madman
>>
>> Now you're starting to get it.
>>
>> The problem is lunatics. THEY are what needs to be locked up.
>>
>> Them and crims.
>
> agree and also restrict there means of doing it. I'm at ease with the
> current laws

No need to change them, again, then.

>
>>
>>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>>
>> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.
>
> any other purpose for guns?

Fuck, you're stupid.

A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.

What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the human
behind the trigger.

Geddit?

>>
>> If you fucks can't state a case without resorting to lies, you don't
>> deserve to be listened to.
>
> getting all angry now are you?

No, just pointing out that you're full of shit and have nothing to say worth
listening to.

>>
>>> is a bit different from an accidental bite.
>>
>> Dickhead, dogs don't bite accidentally. They do it on purpose.
>>
>> One of the key differences between a living creature and an inanimate
>> object.
>
> So you see no difference between a bite or an occasional tragic incident
> and a massacre? Interesting

All I see is a huge difference between inanimate objects and dogs.

>
> BTW I would tighten animal laws to make the owners more responsible for
> injury or deaths.

Tell that to dog-breeder and gun-grabber Samantha Lee.

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:norUq.2236$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

But nyou disagreed with my statement "Any death or injury is a tragedy."

>
>>
>>>
>>> Only the mass ones register on the Leftard radar.
>>>
>>>> However multiple deaths caused by a madman
>>>
>>> Now you're starting to get it.
>>>
>>> The problem is lunatics. THEY are what needs to be locked up.
>>>
>>> Them and crims.
>>
>> agree and also restrict there means of doing it. I'm at ease with the
>> current laws
>
> No need to change them, again, then.

I don't want to

>
>>
>>>
>>>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>>>
>>> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.
>>
>> any other purpose for guns?
>
> Fuck, you're stupid.
>
> A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.
>
> What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the human
> behind the trigger.
>
> Geddit?

Yep gun are for killing

>
>>>
>>> If you fucks can't state a case without resorting to lies, you don't
>>> deserve to be listened to.
>>
>> getting all angry now are you?
>
> No, just pointing out that you're full of shit and have nothing to say
> worth listening to.
>
>>>
>>>> is a bit different from an accidental bite.
>>>
>>> Dickhead, dogs don't bite accidentally. They do it on purpose.
>>>
>>> One of the key differences between a living creature and an inanimate
>>> object.
>>
>> So you see no difference between a bite or an occasional tragic incident
>> and a massacre? Interesting
>
> All I see is a huge difference between inanimate objects and dogs.

So do I

>
>>
>> BTW I would tighten animal laws to make the owners more responsible for
>> injury or deaths.
>
> Tell that to dog-breeder and gun-grabber Samantha Lee.

OK

[F Murtz]

You obviously know nothing about the subject so why waffle on.
Some guns may be made for that purpose, but not all.
Your blanket statement is obviously incorrect and shows your ignorance
on the subject.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:D4idnSIXz8YS3LnS...@westnet.com.au...

>
> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

>>>>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>>>>
>>>> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.
>>>
>>> any other purpose for guns?
>>
>> Fuck, you're stupid.
>>
>> A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.
>>
>> What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the human
>> behind the trigger.
>>
>> Geddit?
>
> Yep gun are for killing

No, they're for launching projectiles.

You're just a fuckwit. That's why you can't understand.

[dechucka]

"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XW%Uq.2529$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

The purpose of gun is to kill. Yes a sport has developed around this to show
how good you are but that does not takeaway that guns are for killing. I'm
not sure why shooters get their knickers in a knot about this, I use my guns
for killing

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:Re5Vq.2538$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:D4idnSIXz8YS3LnS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>
>>>>>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>>>>>
>>>>> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.
>>>>
>>>> any other purpose for guns?
>>>
>>> Fuck, you're stupid.
>>>
>>> A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.
>>>
>>> What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the human
>>> behind the trigger.
>>>
>>> Geddit?
>>
>> Yep gun are for killing
>
> No, they're for launching projectiles.

to kill things or for sport to show how accurate you are for killing things.
OK lots of sporting people don't go and use guns for their intended purpose
but so what

snip

[F Murtz]

That may have been the case originally but not now.There are guns made
specifically for target shooting which are obviously not
designed(made)to kill and are never used for that purpose (although they
possibly could)
The use of obviously incorrect blanket statements"guns are for
killing"(Which suggests all, which is not correct) just inflames emotive
responses and does nothing for sensible discussion.

[dechucka]

>>> You obviously know nothing about the subject so why waffle on.
>>> Some guns may be made for that purpose, but not all.
>>> Your blanket statement is obviously incorrect and shows your ignorance
>>> on the subject.
>>
>> The purpose of gun is to kill. Yes a sport has developed around this to
>> show how good you are but that does not takeaway that guns are for
>> killing. I'm not sure why shooters get their knickers in a knot about
>> this, I use my guns for killing
>
>
> That may have been the case originally but not now.There are guns made
> specifically for target shooting which are obviously not
> designed(made)to kill and are never used for that purpose (although they
> possibly could)

and I am happy with the restrictions on these weapons

> The use of obviously incorrect blanket statements"guns are for
> killing"(Which suggests all, which is not correct) just inflames emotive
> responses and does nothing for sensible discussion.

maybe :-)

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:Au2dnXok9fp3JLjS...@westnet.com.au...

I use my Biathlon rifle to shoot cardboard and steel plate targets.

It's never killed anything.

You fucking idiot.

The purpose of a benchrest rifle is to shoot really small groups in
cardboard targets.

I could go on, but the facts would be wasted on a Leftard fuckwit like you.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1LedncN52ZT7J7jS...@westnet.com.au...

So what?

You're a raving fuckwit and typical Leftard bullshit artist.

That's "so what".

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.

>

> snip

[Spartan613]

"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:8JnVq.2364$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

He's a fuckwit Leftard.

By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion. That would
require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.

[dechucka]

snip

> He's a fuckwit Leftard.

piss off Spartan we're having a sensible discussion

snip

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:TUtVq.2589$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1LedncN52ZT7J7jS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>> news:Re5Vq.2538$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
>>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:D4idnSIXz8YS3LnS...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>>>>>> using a weapon whose only purpose is to kill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spare us the Leftard disinformation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> any other purpose for guns?
>>>>>
>>>>> Fuck, you're stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.
>>>>>
>>>>> What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the
>>>>> human behind the trigger.
>>>>>
>>>>> Geddit?
>>>>
>>>> Yep gun are for killing
>>>
>>> No, they're for launching projectiles.
>>
>> to kill things or for sport to show how accurate you are for killing
>> things. OK lots of sporting people don't go and use guns for their
>> intended purpose but so what
>
> So what?
>
> You're a raving fuckwit and typical Leftard bullshit artist.
>
> That's "so what".

You shouldn't become spokesman for the gun lobby because than nobody would
have guns

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:auOdnV3DbOqGbLvS...@westnet.com.au...

I see you've got no response to the fact that Biathlon and Benchrest rifles
aren't "intended for killing".

Run along, dickhead.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:sPadnbapLbFLbbvS...@westnet.com.au...

No you're not.

You're spreading lies, disinformation and hyperbole.

No free kicks around here, Leftard.

[F Murtz]

Good for robbin banks and killin.

http://www.westernmarksman.ca/K22%20FPE.jpg

http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/anschutzair02.jpg

hide them in your pocket.

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:86PVq.2626$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:sPadnbapLbFLbbvS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> snip
>>
>>> He's a fuckwit Leftard.
>>
>> piss off Spartan we're having a sensible discussion
>>
>> snip
>
> No you're not.

do as your told by your betters. Actually that means everybody

snip

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:R2PVq.2412$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

They are a practice weapon, the purpose of the weapon is to kill. You do
realize how these sports came about don't you?

[bringyagrogalong]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote:
> "F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > dechucka wrote:
> >> "F Murtz" <hagg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> >>> dechucka wrote:
> >>>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>

> >>>>> A firearm has only one purpose. To launch a projectile.
>
> >>>>> What the projectile gets launched at and why is entirely up to the
> >>>>> human behind the trigger.
>
> >>>>> Geddit?
>
> >>>> Yep gun are for killing
>
> >>> You obviously know nothing about the subject so why waffle on.
> >>> Some guns may be made for that purpose, but not all.
> >>> Your blanket statement is obviously incorrect and shows your
> >>> ignorance on the subject.
>
> >> The purpose of gun is to kill. Yes a sport has developed around this to
> >> show how good you are but that does not takeaway that guns are for
> >> killing. I'm not sure why shooters get their knickers in a knot about
> >> this, I use my guns for killing
>
> > That may have been the case originally but not now.There are guns made
> > specifically for target shooting which are obviously not designed(made)to
> > kill and are never used for that purpose (although they possibly could)
> > The use of obviously incorrect blanket statements"guns are for
> > killing"(Which suggests all, which is not correct) just inflames emotive
> > responses and does nothing for sensible discussion.
>
> He's a fuckwit Leftard.

Resorting to name calling usually means that one has lost the debate.

> By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.

It seems like he's the only one who is.

> That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.

And the facts are that guns are for killing.

The minuscule number that aren't can be ignored as being statistically
insignificant.

No points for trying to muddy the waters.

-----------

"Well, that was one boat that did get stopped,

 wasn't it? hahahahahahaha" .

- Tony Abbott on the Costa Concordia disaster after eleven bodies had

 been recovered including that of a five-year-old girl and with 22

 passengers and crew still missing.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:qLydnbq0bJsWxbXS...@westnet.com.au...

Lame.

Take your lies, disinformation and hyperbole elsewhere, loser.

[Spartan613]

"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:4iRVq.2641$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

Yeah, if you're robbing the 1st National Bank of Munchkinville.

> http://www.westernmarksman.ca/K22%20FPE.jpg
>
> http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/anschutzair02.jpg
>
> hide them in your pocket.

You'll find most crims and bank robbers shy away from single shot weapons
that aren't known for one-shot killing ability.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:i7idnbMslZ1_xbXS...@westnet.com.au...

Fuck me, do you make this shit up by yourself, or do you have help?

>the purpose of the weapon is to kill.

It only becomes a "weapon" when someone decides to use it as one.
Like....... wooden mallet hammers, for example.

> You do realize how these sports came about don't you?

You do realise that no one is fooled by your lies, disinformation and
hyperbole, don't you?

[Spartan613]

"bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
news:665bd562-b4f6-4f1f...@i10g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...

*Resorting to name calling usually means that one has lost the debate.

And you do it ALL the time.

> By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.

*It seems like he's the only one who is.

Of course you'd say that. He's your Leftard lickspittle boyfriend.

> That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.

*And the facts are that guns are for killing.

No one's fooled by *your* lies, disinformation and hyperbole either.

What is it with you lot and your pathological lying?

[bringyagrogalong]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote:
> "bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message

So you committed all my posts to memory.

Can't say as I blame you.

> > By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.
>
> *It seems like he's the only one who is.
>
> Of course you'd say that. He's your Leftard lickspittle boyfriend.

Your homo-erotic projection duly noted.

> > That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.
>
> *And the facts are that guns are for killing.
>
> No one's fooled by *your* lies, disinformation and hyperbole either.

Is hyperbole your new word for the month? You're certainly giving it
a flogging.

> What is it with you lot and your pathological lying?

Oh dear! Spartan snipped the following:

"The minuscule number that aren't can be ignored as being
statistically insignificant".

Well, that's it then. Spartan admits defeat.

--------

"Well, that was one boat that did get stopped,
wasn't it? hahahahahahaha"

- Tony Abbott on the Costa Concordia disaster after eleven bodies had

been recovered including a five-year-old girl and with 22 passengers
and crew still missing.

[F Murtz]

If there is one gun not designed (made) for killing it makes that
statement factually incorrect regardless of your assertion.

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:Eg7Wq.2464$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qLydnbq0bJsWxbXS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>> news:86PVq.2626$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
>>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:sPadnbapLbFLbbvS...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> snip
>>>>
>>>>> He's a fuckwit Leftard.
>>>>
>>>> piss off Spartan we're having a sensible discussion
>>>>
>>>> snip
>>>
>>> No you're not.
>>
>> do as your told by your betters. Actually that means everybody
>>
>> snip
>
> Lame.
>
> Take your lies, disinformation and hyperbole elsewhere, loser.

nothing rational from you I see, go back to your cousin and your banjo

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:tr7Wq.2672$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

you are the perfect example of the need for gun controls

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

So if someone shows that you use lies, disinformation and hyperbole, you
consider them to be a firearm risk. Next you'll be blaming the
Queensland floods on coal miners.

--
"If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop
for about a thousand years. "
-- Tim (it ain't a gonna rain no more) Flannery
- Australian Climate Commissar

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
message news:jgchsa$idh$1...@dont-email.me...

No and this certainly hasn't happened in this case. The lunatic fringe of
the gun owners give the rest of us a bad name

> Next you'll be blaming the Queensland floods on coal miners.

? strange even for you

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

A mere extension of your criterion for gun ownership control to be
exercised over someone who observes "your lies, disinformation and
hyperbole." Equal degrees of connection.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:5IydnSTcyPApI7TS...@westnet.com.au...

How do you figure that?

Is it because I won't roll over for you and accept your lies, disinformation
and hyperbole like a good little drone?

You're a perfect example of the need for birth controls. You're what happens
when siblings breed.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:ZKidnT_D9c8RSrTS...@westnet.com.au...

Us?

Hardly. A true firearms owner/user would know that firearms aren't weapons
unless someone chooses to use them as such.

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.



>
>

[Spartan613]

"bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message

news:e380a8be-5569-41da...@qv4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

No need to. It's your stock in trade.

> Can't say as I blame you.

Get over yourself, dickhead.

>> > By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.
>>
>> *It seems like he's the only one who is.
>>
>> Of course you'd say that. He's your Leftard lickspittle boyfriend.
>
> Your homo-erotic projection duly noted.

Only you would even think of that.

Says more about you and your perversions than it does about me.

>> > That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.
>>
>> *And the facts are that guns are for killing.
>>
>> No one's fooled by *your* lies, disinformation and hyperbole either.
>
> Is hyperbole your new word for the month? You're certainly giving it
> a flogging.

Yeah, cool huh?

Can you say "hyper bowl", ya dumb Leftard fuckwit. It's Dear Leader Juliar's
contribution to the Australian lexicon, after all.

>
>> What is it with you lot and your pathological lying?
>
> Oh dear! Spartan snipped the following:

I notice you didn't answer the question.

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.

>

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:HaudnYzxXKzBI7TS...@westnet.com.au...

Pot, this is kettle, over.

> I see, go back to your cousin and your banjo

Nothing rational from you, I see.

[bringyagrogalong]

To be so au fait with my posts hints of worship.

> > Can't say as I blame you.
>
> Get over yourself, dickhead.

But it's you who, by your own admission, commits my posts to memory.

> >> > By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.
>
> >> *It seems like he's the only one who is.
>
> >> Of course you'd say that. He's your Leftard lickspittle boyfriend.
>
> > Your homo-erotic projection duly noted.
>
> Only you would even think of that.

WTF it was you who suggested a homosexual relationship with the OP.

> Says more about you and your perversions than it does about me.

What it says is that you're one sick little puppy.

> >> > That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.
>
> >> *And the facts are that guns are for killing.
>
> >> No one's fooled by *your* lies, disinformation and hyperbole either.
>
> > Is hyperbole your new word for the month?  You're certainly giving it
> > a flogging.
>
> Yeah, cool huh?

Only to those with a limited vocabulary.

> Can you say "hyper bowl", ya dumb Leftard fuckwit. It's Dear Leader Juliar's
> contribution to the Australian lexicon, after all.

I would have thought that "bole" and "bowl" were pronounced the same.

> >> What is it with you lot and your pathological lying?
>
> > Oh dear! Spartan snipped the following:
>
> I notice you didn't answer the question.

What question was that?

> > "The minuscule number that aren't can be ignored as being
> > statistically insignificant".

No denial duly noted.

> > Well, that's it then. Spartan admits defeat.

Oh dear, no denial again duly noted.

How fucking easy is this. LOL

------

Mining contributes a paltry 5.6 per cent to Australia's gross domestic
product; employs a derisory 1.3 per cent of the workforce; pays an
average miserly tax rate of just 17 per cent; and sends 83 per cent of
its obscene profits offshore to foreign owners.

And fuckwitted, easily manipulated retards fell for the advertising
campaign by the mining companies that they shouldn't pay any more tax.

"I saw it on the telly" say the dull-witted lowbrows, "they're paying
too much tax".

God fucking help us!

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgd65g$ecj$1...@dont-email.me...

another one of your bizarre connections

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:JDtWq.2506$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

than they are just a piece of useless metal wood and or plastic. Rather
pointless having them

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:OBtWq.2505$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

If I am an example than it should be made compulsory. Imagine how even
greater I would have been if my parents had been related using your belief

[dechucka]

snip

> Nothing rational from you, I see.

I only use rational debate talking to rational people

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from your northern African
river vantage point.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

A bit like bronze statues, but Labor love accumulating those with our money.

[dechucka]

snip

>>>>> Next you'll be blaming the Queensland floods on coal miners.
>>>>
>>>> ? strange even for you
>>>
>>> A mere extension of your criterion for gun ownership control to be
>>> exercised over someone who observes "your lies, disinformation and
>>> hyperbole." Equal degrees of connection.
>>
>> another one of your bizarre connections
>
> I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from your northern African
> river vantage point.

as I said trying to connect 2 unconnected matters is bizarre even for you.

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgf76j$smn$3...@dont-email.me...

?

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

As I said, I wouldn't expect you to see the connection from your vantage
point in Egypt.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Pointless, useless bit of junk.

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgfgc1$c8r$2...@dont-email.me...

> On 3/02/2012 12:53 PM, dechucka wrote:
>> snip
>>
>>>>>>> Next you'll be blaming the Queensland floods on coal miners.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ? strange even for you
>>>>>
>>>>> A mere extension of your criterion for gun ownership control to be
>>>>> exercised over someone who observes "your lies, disinformation and
>>>>> hyperbole." Equal degrees of connection.
>>>>
>>>> another one of your bizarre connections
>>>
>>> I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from your northern African
>>> river vantage point.
>>
>> as I said trying to connect 2 unconnected matters is bizarre even for
>> you.
>
> As I said, I wouldn't expect you to see the connection from your vantage
> point in Egypt.

no justification of your bizarre linking I see

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgfgdf$c8r$3...@dont-email.me...

Designed to be nice to look at, just like guns are designed to kill or
practice the skills required to kill

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

As I said, you cant see it from de Nile, especially with your blinders on.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Saw a heap of guns at my local RSL last night. Nice to look at, but
that's about all. Of particular interest is the Jingal 3-man gun. Not
designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
Unfortunately, the bloke at the front dies when it's fired, and probably
the one at the rear from injuries. The one propping up the weight at the
middle survives.

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgfjcd$nth$2...@dont-email.me...

> On 3/02/2012 1:59 PM, dechucka wrote:
>>
>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
>> message news:jgfgc1$c8r$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 3/02/2012 12:53 PM, dechucka wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Next you'll be blaming the Queensland floods on coal miners.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ? strange even for you
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A mere extension of your criterion for gun ownership control to be
>>>>>>> exercised over someone who observes "your lies, disinformation and
>>>>>>> hyperbole." Equal degrees of connection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> another one of your bizarre connections
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from your northern African
>>>>> river vantage point.
>>>>
>>>> as I said trying to connect 2 unconnected matters is bizarre even for
>>>> you.
>>>
>>> As I said, I wouldn't expect you to see the connection from your
>>> vantage point in Egypt.
>>
>> no justification of your bizarre linking I see
>
> As I said, you cant see it from de Nile, especially with your blinders on.

but again no explanation, I suggest there isn't one

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgfl37$udc$1...@dont-email.me...

Didn't know the Japanese used Jingals or Gingals, would you happen to know
the designation of it

>Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.

That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not kill
people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you want to go
that way?

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:I6WdnUK43OhlmrbS...@westnet.com.au...

>
> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
> news:JDtWq.2506$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>>> No and this certainly hasn't happened in this case. The lunatic fringe
>>> of the gun owners give the rest of us a bad name
>>
>> Us?
>>
>> Hardly. A true firearms owner/user would know that firearms aren't
>> weapons unless someone chooses to use them as such.
>
> than they are just a piece of useless metal wood and or plastic. Rather
> pointless having them

Slowly, slowly, you're getting there.

But you just can't help yourself when it comes to working in some lies and
disinformation.

They are not useless.... they're INANIMATE pieces of metal, wood, or
plastic.

Whether they are useless, or useful, depends on the user.

For example, a rifle is pretty useless as a tent peg. But if you want to
stop a feral cat in its tracks, it's very useful.

It's on pointless having them if, as in your case, you don't know what
they're for.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:d9-dnT03Y4l_0LbS...@westnet.com.au...

Clearly, you know fuck all about art, too.

Some art isn't designed to be "nice to look at". Sometimes it's designed to
"challenge" the viewer.

I thought you Leftards were supposed to be "people" people. You appear
ignorant of the human factor in EVERYTHING.

Assigning characteristics to inanimate objects and such. You completely
overlook, or ignore, the human factor.

> just like guns are designed to kill or practice the skills required to
> kill

You left out "make neat little holes in paper or make steel plates fall
over".

You've been giving the facts, and yet you ignore them.

Why?

Too attached (like Juliar Gillied) to lies, disinformation and "hyper bowl"?

[Spartan613]

"bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message

news:fc354d93-85d7-4883...@uc9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

*To be so au fait with my posts hints of worship.

(There's disinformation).

Actually, I skim past hundreds of them without reading.

> > Can't say as I blame you.
>
> Get over yourself, dickhead.

*But it's you who, by your own admission, commits my posts to memory.

(There's a lie).

I never said anything of the sort, liar.

> >> > By definition, he's not interested in sensible discussion.
>
> >> *It seems like he's the only one who is.
>
> >> Of course you'd say that. He's your Leftard lickspittle boyfriend.
>
> > Your homo-erotic projection duly noted.
>
> Only you would even think of that.

*WTF it was you who suggested a homosexual relationship with the OP.

(Here's the hyperbole).

The thought of you and your mate swapping isn't erotic. It's pretty
stomach-churning.

But you go ahead, it's a free country.

> Says more about you and your perversions than it does about me.

*What it says is that you're one sick little puppy.

No, I'm fine. Thanks. Haven't been sick since the flu two years ago.

> >> > That would require him to tell the truth and stick to the facts.
>
> >> *And the facts are that guns are for killing.
>
> >> No one's fooled by *your* lies, disinformation and hyperbole either.
>
> > Is hyperbole your new word for the month? You're certainly giving it
> > a flogging.
>
> Yeah, cool huh?

*Only to those with a limited vocabulary.

You mean like Juliar Gillied?

She's right up there with Pauline "Please explain" Hanson.

Two red-headed bogans if ever I saw them.

> Can you say "hyper bowl", ya dumb Leftard fuckwit. It's Dear Leader
> Juliar's
> contribution to the Australian lexicon, after all.

*I would have thought that "bole" and "bowl" were pronounced the same.

Not in the context of the word "hyperbole".

Are you a "westie" or a "houso"? Like your lying leader Juliar.

> >> What is it with you lot and your pathological lying?
>
> > Oh dear! Spartan snipped the following:
>
> I notice you didn't answer the question.

*What question was that?

> > "The minuscule number that aren't can be ignored as being
> > statistically insignificant".

*No denial duly noted.

> > Well, that's it then. Spartan admits defeat.

*Oh dear, no denial again duly noted.

*How fucking easy is this. LOL

To demonstrate you're a dull-witted communist wog with limited English
comprehension skills?

"Fish, and "barrel" come to mind.

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:ifednQzQFNn1lbbS...@westnet.com.au...

Okay, that's pretty fucking weird.

And you consider yourself rational.

Yeah. Right.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

On 3/02/2012 3:57 PM, dechucka wrote:
>
> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
> message news:jgfjcd$nth$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On 3/02/2012 1:59 PM, dechucka wrote:
>>>
>>> "Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in
>>> message news:jgfgc1$c8r$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 3/02/2012 12:53 PM, dechucka wrote:
>>>>> snip
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Next you'll be blaming the Queensland floods on coal miners.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ? strange even for you
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A mere extension of your criterion for gun ownership control to be
>>>>>>>> exercised over someone who observes "your lies, disinformation and
>>>>>>>> hyperbole." Equal degrees of connection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> another one of your bizarre connections
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from your northern African
>>>>>> river vantage point.
>>>>>
>>>>> as I said trying to connect 2 unconnected matters is bizarre even for
>>>>> you.
>>>>
>>>> As I said, I wouldn't expect you to see the connection from your
>>>> vantage point in Egypt.
>>>
>>> no justification of your bizarre linking I see
>>
>> As I said, you cant see it from de Nile, especially with your blinders
>> on.
>
> but again no explanation, I suggest there isn't one

and again, I wouldn't expect you to be able to see it from a felucca in
Egypt.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Not off hand. Just that the plaque says it was souvenired from the Boxer
Rebellion. It's longer than those I've seen in pictures, at least 8 ft.
I'd say. Appears to have a bore of around 1".

>
>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>
> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
> want to go that way?

You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It was
designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of destroying the
supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jggk8v$9n2$4...@dont-email.me...

there isn't, just more random OT stuff from oy

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jggkk5$dt6$1...@dont-email.me...

Sorry about the Japanese comment. I think you'll find that the Chinese
Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e

>
>>
>>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>>
>> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
>> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
>> want to go that way?
>
> You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It was
> designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of destroying the
> supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.

So you want to go the pedantic route fair enough, I agree AA guns shoot down
planes they are not designed to kill, anti tank weapons shoot tanks not
designed to kill people, exocet missiles are designed to blow up ships not
kill people ( some RN personnel from the Falklands may disagree )

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:x_KWq.2542$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

making it nice to look at. I like a nice challenge

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:ZUKWq.2734$%E2....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...

> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:I6WdnUK43OhlmrbS...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message
>> news:JDtWq.2506$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
>>> "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>>> No and this certainly hasn't happened in this case. The lunatic fringe
>>>> of the gun owners give the rest of us a bad name
>>>
>>> Us?
>>>
>>> Hardly. A true firearms owner/user would know that firearms aren't
>>> weapons unless someone chooses to use them as such.
>>
>> than they are just a piece of useless metal wood and or plastic. Rather
>> pointless having them
>
> Slowly, slowly, you're getting there.
>
> But you just can't help yourself when it comes to working in some lies and
> disinformation.
>
> They are not useless.... they're INANIMATE pieces of metal, wood, or
> plastic.
>
> Whether they are useless, or useful, depends on the user.
>
> For example, a rifle is pretty useless as a tent peg. But if you want to
> stop a feral cat in its tracks, it's very useful.

So its use is for killing or practicing the skills needed for killing

snip

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:_cLWq.2544$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

It is

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Simply things your denial and blinders prevent you from seeing. Poor
dechucka.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

As always, your "research" in matters historical needs some vetting.
No problem - I knew it was Chinese, not Japanese. :-)

> I think you'll find that the Chinese
> Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
> http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e

I only go by the research used to produce the plaque. I think we looked
it up in one of the history books in the RSL "war room library" one time
and found more on the usage for holing hulls. That also confirmed the
survival probabilities of those who had to fire it. Makes sense - you
can do a lot more damage sinking a supply ship than knocking down a
dozen blokes with a steel ball. I notice your reference cites 7' long. I
know this one is at least 8', since that's the width of the doorway
opening it hangs over, and it protrudes beyond its extremes. It's
possibly a different variant to the one described in your source. I'll
stick with what the researched plaque says, thanks. (Sure you'll
understand ;-)) Your reference that it was anti-personnel BTW?

>>
>>>
>>>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>>>
>>> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
>>> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
>>> want to go that way?
>>
>> You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It
>> was designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of
>> destroying the supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.
>
> So you want to go the pedantic route fair enough,

I thought that would appeal to you. I'm still unsure of your criterion
as to when pedantry becomes appropriate.

> I agree AA guns shoot
> down planes they are not designed to kill, anti tank weapons shoot tanks
> not designed to kill people, exocet missiles are designed to blow up
> ships not kill people ( some RN personnel from the Falklands may disagree )

This is starting to draw the bow a bit long IMHO. The gingal is probably
the biggest stretch from the Australian "gun ownership" issue I would
make. Just BTW, none of the weapons at the RSL can fire AFAIK. If I had
to grab a weapon there, I'd probably go for the Gurkha knife, similar to
the one I bought off a Nepalese policeman some decades ago.

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jghtvt$1ed$1...@dont-email.me...

Actually I made an assumption which one never should

>
>> I think you'll find that the Chinese
>> Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
>> http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e
>
> I only go by the research used to produce the plaque. I think we looked it
> up in one of the history books in the RSL "war room library" one time and
> found more on the usage for holing hulls. That also confirmed the survival
> probabilities of those who had to fire it. Makes sense - you can do a lot
> more damage sinking a supply ship than knocking down a dozen blokes with a
> steel ball. I notice your reference cites 7' long. I know this one is at
> least 8', since that's the width of the doorway opening it hangs over, and
> it protrudes beyond its extremes. It's possibly a different variant to the
> one described in your source. I'll stick with what the researched plaque
> says, thanks. (Sure you'll understand ;-)) Your reference that it was
> anti-personnel BTW?

I beleive the Gingal is a multi purpose weapon.

Good on the research of the RSL. Would be interested in a cite to your book

>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>>>>
>>>> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
>>>> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
>>>> want to go that way?
>>>
>>> You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It
>>> was designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of
>>> destroying the supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.
>>
>> So you want to go the pedantic route fair enough,
> I thought that would appeal to you. I'm still unsure of your criterion as
> to when pedantry becomes appropriate.
>
>> I agree AA guns shoot
>> down planes they are not designed to kill, anti tank weapons shoot tanks
>> not designed to kill people, exocet missiles are designed to blow up
>> ships not kill people ( some RN personnel from the Falklands may
>> disagree )
> This is starting to draw the bow a bit long IMHO. The gingal is probably
> the biggest stretch from the Australian "gun ownership" issue I would
> make. Just BTW, none of the weapons at the RSL can fire AFAIK. If I had to
> grab a weapon there, I'd probably go for the Gurkha knife, similar to the
> one I bought off a Nepalese policeman some decades ago.

not now they can't

[F Murtz]

of all the ridiculous idiotic statements I have heard this one takes the
cake.
So the many people who shoot targets for sport are "practicing the
skills needed for killing" Unlike you (Who seem to sit around dreaming
up anti gun rubbish assuming the populace have your twisted views) I
doubt they have ever entertained such thoughts.

[dechucka]

"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bq1Xq.2595$v14....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

That is the basis of your sport. just like Pentatholon is based on
delivering a message through enemy lines

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

Regardless of how you explain it, I (now instinctively :-)) realized it
should be checked on.

>>
>>> I think you'll find that the Chinese
>>> Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
>>> http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e
>>
>> I only go by the research used to produce the plaque. I think we
>> looked it up in one of the history books in the RSL "war room library"
>> one time and found more on the usage for holing hulls. That also
>> confirmed the survival probabilities of those who had to fire it.
>> Makes sense - you can do a lot more damage sinking a supply ship than
>> knocking down a dozen blokes with a steel ball. I notice your
>> reference cites 7' long. I know this one is at least 8', since that's
>> the width of the doorway opening it hangs over, and it protrudes
>> beyond its extremes. It's possibly a different variant to the one
>> described in your source. I'll stick with what the researched plaque
>> says, thanks. (Sure you'll understand ;-)) Your reference that it was
>> anti-personnel BTW?
>
> I beleive the Gingal is a multi purpose weapon.

I believe what I read on the researched plaque.

> Good on the research of the RSL. Would be interested in a cite to your book

Wouldn't know what it was or where to even find it now. They got rid of
lots of their "back room" stuff to make more room for bloody pokies. I
sent some items personally to a friend who works for the Somme tourist
department in Amiens, for display in various museums etc. over there.
Who knows where everything else has ended up.

>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
>>>>> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
>>>>> want to go that way?
>>>>
>>>> You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It
>>>> was designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of
>>>> destroying the supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.
>>>
>>> So you want to go the pedantic route fair enough,
>> I thought that would appeal to you. I'm still unsure of your criterion
>> as to when pedantry becomes appropriate.
>>
>>> I agree AA guns shoot
>>> down planes they are not designed to kill, anti tank weapons shoot tanks
>>> not designed to kill people, exocet missiles are designed to blow up
>>> ships not kill people ( some RN personnel from the Falklands may
>>> disagree )
>> This is starting to draw the bow a bit long IMHO. The gingal is
>> probably the biggest stretch from the Australian "gun ownership" issue
>> I would make. Just BTW, none of the weapons at the RSL can fire AFAIK.
>> If I had to grab a weapon there, I'd probably go for the Gurkha knife,
>> similar to the one I bought off a Nepalese policeman some decades ago.
>
> not now they can't

Why?

[dechucka]

snip>>>> Sorry about the Japanese comment.

>>> As always, your "research" in matters historical needs some vetting.
>>> No problem - I knew it was Chinese, not Japanese. :-)
>>
>> Actually I made an assumption which one never should
> Regardless of how you explain it, I (now instinctively :-)) realized it
> should be checked on.

Hope you learnt something

>
>>>
>>>> I think you'll find that the Chinese
>>>> Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e
>>>
>>> I only go by the research used to produce the plaque. I think we
>>> looked it up in one of the history books in the RSL "war room library"
>>> one time and found more on the usage for holing hulls. That also
>>> confirmed the survival probabilities of those who had to fire it.
>>> Makes sense - you can do a lot more damage sinking a supply ship than
>>> knocking down a dozen blokes with a steel ball. I notice your
>>> reference cites 7' long. I know this one is at least 8', since that's
>>> the width of the doorway opening it hangs over, and it protrudes
>>> beyond its extremes. It's possibly a different variant to the one
>>> described in your source. I'll stick with what the researched plaque
>>> says, thanks. (Sure you'll understand ;-)) Your reference that it was
>>> anti-personnel BTW?
>>
>> I beleive the Gingal is a multi purpose weapon.
> I believe what I read on the researched plaque.

fair enough, but you must admit it killed somone ;-(

>
>> Good on the research of the RSL. Would be interested in a cite to your
>> book
> Wouldn't know what it was or where to even find it now. They got rid of
> lots of their "back room" stuff to make more room for bloody pokies. I
> sent some items personally to a friend who works for the Somme tourist
> department in Amiens, for display in various museums etc. over there. Who
> knows where everything else has ended up.

Fair enough

>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not designed to kill at all, but to hole the hull of a wooden ship.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is like saying anti tank guns are designed to blow up tanks not
>>>>>> kill people, pedantically you may have an argument but really do you
>>>>>> want to go that way?
>>>>>
>>>>> You said all guns were designed to kill people. This one was not. It
>>>>> was designed to sink ships, probably in port, with the aim of
>>>>> destroying the supplies on board. Feel free to proceed.
>>>>
>>>> So you want to go the pedantic route fair enough,
>>> I thought that would appeal to you. I'm still unsure of your criterion
>>> as to when pedantry becomes appropriate.
>>>
>>>> I agree AA guns shoot
>>>> down planes they are not designed to kill, anti tank weapons shoot
>>>> tanks
>>>> not designed to kill people, exocet missiles are designed to blow up
>>>> ships not kill people ( some RN personnel from the Falklands may
>>>> disagree )
>>> This is starting to draw the bow a bit long IMHO. The gingal is
>>> probably the biggest stretch from the Australian "gun ownership" issue
>>> I would make. Just BTW, none of the weapons at the RSL can fire AFAIK.
>>> If I had to grab a weapon there, I'd probably go for the Gurkha knife,
>>> similar to the one I bought off a Nepalese policeman some decades ago.
>>
>> not now they can't
> Why?

they have been made inoperative or your RSL is in breaking a few laws

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

I wonder how many modern day archers go out and practice at bulleyes, as
a means of honing their skills for "the kill"?

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgic0n$rh4$2...@dont-email.me...

once again the purpose of their sport among others

[Spartan613]

"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:E7GdnUGYAuF8y7HS...@westnet.com.au...

I knew you wouldn't be able to resist. You're easier to play than a pair of
bongos.

So what about target rifles whose design function is to knock over steel
plates?

Anyway, I'm bored with your bullshit.

You've had the facts given to you, but you prefer to spruik shit.

--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".

Robert A. Heinlein.

>

> snip

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

On 4/02/2012 3:25 PM, dechucka wrote:
> snip>>>> Sorry about the Japanese comment.
>>>> As always, your "research" in matters historical needs some vetting.
>>>> No problem - I knew it was Chinese, not Japanese. :-)
>>>
>>> Actually I made an assumption which one never should
>> Regardless of how you explain it, I (now instinctively :-)) realized
>> it should be checked on.
>
> Hope you learnt something

No. I already knew that everything you state as fact needs to be
checked. And I also knew the gingal was Chinese, nothing to do with
Japan. Case in point. :-)

>>>>
>>>>> I think you'll find that the Chinese
>>>>> Gingal used in the Boxer Rebellion was not an anti wooden boat weapon.
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/74xvd7e
>>>>
>>>> I only go by the research used to produce the plaque. I think we
>>>> looked it up in one of the history books in the RSL "war room library"
>>>> one time and found more on the usage for holing hulls. That also
>>>> confirmed the survival probabilities of those who had to fire it.
>>>> Makes sense - you can do a lot more damage sinking a supply ship than
>>>> knocking down a dozen blokes with a steel ball. I notice your
>>>> reference cites 7' long. I know this one is at least 8', since that's
>>>> the width of the doorway opening it hangs over, and it protrudes
>>>> beyond its extremes. It's possibly a different variant to the one
>>>> described in your source. I'll stick with what the researched plaque
>>>> says, thanks. (Sure you'll understand ;-)) Your reference that it was
>>>> anti-personnel BTW?
>>>
>>> I beleive the Gingal is a multi purpose weapon.
>> I believe what I read on the researched plaque.
>
> fair enough, but you must admit it killed somone ;-(

So do cars, but they're not designed to.

OK, thought you were talking about Nepalese cops selling their Gurkha
knives to tourists.

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

is to what? (I would offer you another shovel, but it might hit you when
it falls into that very deep hole you've already dug yourself into.)

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

I suggest we introduce chess control laws, since the game serves to
teach war strategy, which is intended for mass killings. Do we want a
culture like that of the USA, where chess is played freely and many
family homes house multiple chess sets? Look at how many wars have
resulted involving the USA, as a result of the free access to this war
strategy game. Do we really want a mob of homicidal chess fanatics like
the USCF in our country?

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgjae4$jhh$1...@dont-email.me...

Didn't know Nepalese cops carried them didn't see them in the early 70's or
last year

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgjb2a$lru$2...@dont-email.me...

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

"The purpose of their sport" is to ....... <fill in the missing bit>

>
>
>
> (I would offer you another shovel, but it might hit you when
>> it falls into that very deep hole you've already dug yourself into.)
>

[Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax]

On 5/02/2012 11:49 AM, dechucka wrote:
>

The khukuri appeared to be standard issue in the 80s.You were probably
too drug-addled in the 70s to have noticed. It's all come back to bite
you now. :-)

[dechucka]

"Spartan613" <nos...@buggeroff.com> wrote in message

news:XQ9Xq.2614$v14...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

same thing. If you can't understand how and why your sport developed so be
it

>
> Anyway, I'm bored with your bullshit.
>
> You've had the facts given to you, but you prefer to spruik shit.

run away little man

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgko50$dd9$1...@dont-email.me...

I apologise looking at some old photos they carried them in the 70s

>It's all come back to bite you now. :-)

For all the hard living I've done I'm in disgustingly good health according
to my Dr. Might bite still

[dechucka]

"Oy Rool Out a Carbon Tax" <gillar...@promises.are.invalid> wrote in

message news:jgknnr$ajq$3...@dont-email.me...

aim arrows at targets that developed from training and competition to kill
things