Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Is it true that the NRA demands background checks on some/all employees
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Dechucka
May 20, 2013, 7:35:26 PM5/20/13
to
Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
Clocky
May 20, 2013, 8:30:42 PM5/20/13
to
Dechucka wrote:
> Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
Yes, you have to prove that you're a crackpot to be employed.
> Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
Poof
May 21, 2013, 3:39:18 AM5/21/13
to
anti-gun zealots as plants.
Dechucka
May 21, 2013, 4:31:59 AM5/21/13
to
"Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c3017d09-85dd-4656...@a15g2000pbu.googlegroups.com...
so a background check for employment is OK but not for a gun
Poof
May 21, 2013, 8:16:44 AM5/21/13
to
On May 21, 6:31 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Didn't say, or even suggest that Chuckles.
In case you didn't know, in the relevant context, that is the
Australian context, we already have a licensing regime that includes
background checks. What the NRA does in relation to background checks
for employees is what any responsible company would do.
The NRA position on background checks in relation to firearms is an
American issue and one would have to be an expert on their
Constitution, Supreme Court decisions, US culture and politics and the
nuances attached thereto. Are you such a person, or do just like
making white noise for the sake of it?
> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
In case you didn't know, in the relevant context, that is the
Australian context, we already have a licensing regime that includes
background checks. What the NRA does in relation to background checks
for employees is what any responsible company would do.
The NRA position on background checks in relation to firearms is an
American issue and one would have to be an expert on their
Constitution, Supreme Court decisions, US culture and politics and the
nuances attached thereto. Are you such a person, or do just like
making white noise for the sake of it?
Dechucka
May 21, 2013, 4:10:41 PM5/21/13
to
news:7217c46b-e8fb-4a8b...@a9g2000pbq.googlegroups.com...
actually you did
In case you didn't know, in the relevant context, that is the
Australian context, we already have a licensing regime that includes
background checks. What the NRA does in relation to background checks
for employees is what any responsible company would do.
The NRA position on background checks in relation to firearms is an
American issue and one would have to be an expert on their
Constitution, Supreme Court decisions, US culture and politics and the
nuances attached thereto. Are you such a person, or do just like
making white noise for the sake of it?
=============================
the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for their
employees is what amazes me
On May 21, 6:31 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c3017d09-85dd-4656...@a15g2000pbu.googlegroups.com...
> On May 21, 10:30 am, Clocky <notg...@happen.com> wrote:
>
> > Dechucka wrote:
> > > Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
>
> > Yes, you have to prove that you're a crackpot to be employed.
>
> More-so to make sure they are upright law-abiding citizens and not
> anti-gun zealots as plants.
>
> =======================
>
> so a background check for employment is OK but not for a gun
Didn't say, or even suggest that Chuckles.
================================
> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c3017d09-85dd-4656...@a15g2000pbu.googlegroups.com...
> On May 21, 10:30 am, Clocky <notg...@happen.com> wrote:
>
> > Dechucka wrote:
> > > Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
>
> > Yes, you have to prove that you're a crackpot to be employed.
>
> More-so to make sure they are upright law-abiding citizens and not
> anti-gun zealots as plants.
>
> =======================
>
> so a background check for employment is OK but not for a gun
Didn't say, or even suggest that Chuckles.
actually you did
In case you didn't know, in the relevant context, that is the
Australian context, we already have a licensing regime that includes
background checks. What the NRA does in relation to background checks
for employees is what any responsible company would do.
The NRA position on background checks in relation to firearms is an
American issue and one would have to be an expert on their
Constitution, Supreme Court decisions, US culture and politics and the
nuances attached thereto. Are you such a person, or do just like
making white noise for the sake of it?
the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for their
employees is what amazes me
Poof
May 21, 2013, 9:59:28 PM5/21/13
to
This is an American topic and if you knew anything, anything at all,
you would understand that when it all boils down the average informed
US citizen does not trust their Government, and rightly so.
I'll put it simply - while an organization, any organization, is free
to vet the bona fides and the background of an applicant for
employment, it is another matter for the Government to do it.
Dechucka
May 21, 2013, 10:03:53 PM5/21/13
to
news:204b08e5-d6a0-48de...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
=====================================================
Can you back up your claim?
I'll put it simply - while an organization, any organization, is free
to vet the bona fides and the background of an applicant for
employment, it is another matter for the Government to do it.
====================================================
however vetting your potential employees but opposing background checks on
gun owners reeks of hypocrisy
Can you back up your claim?
I'll put it simply - while an organization, any organization, is free
to vet the bona fides and the background of an applicant for
employment, it is another matter for the Government to do it.
however vetting your potential employees but opposing background checks on
gun owners reeks of hypocrisy
Clocky
May 22, 2013, 12:31:20 AM5/22/13
to
Normal people are not zealots, the pro-gunners are extremists.
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 12:33:22 AM5/22/13
to
between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
*any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
in recent years re: 'gun control'.
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 12:35:40 AM5/22/13
to
(and others) face.
Clocky
May 22, 2013, 12:38:49 AM5/22/13
to
it's just the NRA crackpots with their "red under the bed" ignorance and
paranoia that push that bullshit.
Interesting that they won't trust their government but are happy to
entrust any old unbalanced crackpot with a gun and to NRA membership.
>
> I'll put it simply - while an organization, any organization, is free
> to vet the bona fides and the background of an applicant for
> employment, it is another matter for the Government to do it.
> ====================================================
> however vetting your potential employees but opposing background checks
> on gun owners reeks of hypocrisy
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 12:39:58 AM5/22/13
to
"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 1:29:01 AM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
There's always this approach as well of course:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d8/Tianasquare.jpg/300px-Tianasquare.jpg
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d8/Tianasquare.jpg/300px-Tianasquare.jpg
Trevor Wilson
May 22, 2013, 1:31:39 AM5/22/13
to
oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out. As for gun control laws, the
continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 1:43:08 AM5/22/13
to
>As for gun control laws, the
>continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
>a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 1:42:58 AM5/22/13
to
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 1:45:07 AM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:42:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
Indeed it is, which is why I posted it.
It's not a method I'd want to rely on though.
It's not a method I'd want to rely on though.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 1:46:56 AM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 1:50:52 AM5/22/13
to
"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:0lmop8h9d6gnle4mr...@4ax.com...
make fuck all difference
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 1:52:45 AM5/22/13
to
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
the pub
>
>
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 2:14:34 AM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 2:15:50 AM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:50:52 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
I'll have to disagree with that. It would make all the difference.
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>news:0lmop8h9d6gnle4mr...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 2:21:19 AM5/22/13
to
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 2:22:13 AM5/22/13
to
"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:0joop8ptf39dnm9ea...@4ax.com...
>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 2:30:07 AM5/22/13
to
XXXX...
keithr
May 22, 2013, 3:35:15 AM5/22/13
to
On 22/05/2013 11:59 AM, Poof wrote:
> This is an American topic and if you knew anything, anything at all,
> you would understand that when it all boils down the average informed
> US citizen does not trust their Government, and rightly so.
You get the government that you vote for. The fact that over 40% of
> This is an American topic and if you knew anything, anything at all,
> you would understand that when it all boils down the average informed
> US citizen does not trust their Government, and rightly so.
Americans don't bother to vote would seem to indicate that they don't
give a flying fuck either way.
bringyagrogalong
May 22, 2013, 7:27:53 AM5/22/13
to
people to vote on a Tuesday when most people are working and
struggling to get home.
Civilised countries vote on a Saturday.
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 22, 2013, 8:25:42 AM5/22/13
to
On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:35:26 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
Of course you did.
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true
[chuckle]
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 8:38:42 AM5/22/13
to
"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:r9epp8h52ovpm2ufh...@4ax.com...
the papers
>
> [chuckle]
>
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 1:35:05 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ItOdnSA6lP8_ugHM...@westnet.com.au...
Why ?
You're not vetting the employees on the issue of their exercise of their
rights
You are vetting them for employment purposes
Apparently, you're too fucking stupid to understand the difference
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 1:36:10 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 1:42:22 PM5/22/13
to
"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Which sometimes results in this
http://abettingman.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tiananmen-square-massacre-tank-blood.jpg
But the silly argument that anyone would stand up to a tank with a .22
pistol is typical of the nonsense that dechucklehead posts
news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
http://abettingman.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tiananmen-square-massacre-tank-blood.jpg
But the silly argument that anyone would stand up to a tank with a .22
pistol is typical of the nonsense that dechucklehead posts
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 1:44:51 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GKadnZHr3aBPwQHM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:0lmop8h9d6gnle4mr...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
has an advantage and a cowed pack of subjects like you..
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 1:48:44 PM5/22/13
to
"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:0joop8ptf39dnm9ea...@4ax.com...
>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
A whole bunch of people did exactly that after Katrina in New Orleans
Funny how the government goons went somewhere else to do their confiscation
And they had no problems beating up on old ladies to do it.
And there was a Utah National Guard unit that flat out refused to
participate.
news:0joop8ptf39dnm9ea...@4ax.com...
>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Funny how the government goons went somewhere else to do their confiscation
And they had no problems beating up on old ladies to do it.
And there was a Utah National Guard unit that flat out refused to
participate.
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 3:45:30 PM5/22/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 12:48:44 -0500, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Yes. That's how they operate, easier targets.
>And there was a Utah National Guard unit that flat out refused to
>participate.
That's great to hear.
wrote:
>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>news:0joop8ptf39dnm9ea...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:50:52 +1000, "Dechucka"
>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:50:52 +1000, "Dechucka"
>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>And there was a Utah National Guard unit that flat out refused to
>participate.
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 3:48:37 PM5/22/13
to
wasn't... what sort of voter turnout would we have? I'd wager it'd be
very similar to the USAians.
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 4:02:34 PM5/22/13
to
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
ozarkheart
>
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 4:07:57 PM5/22/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 06:02:34 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
context you used it in.
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 4:11:03 PM5/22/13
to
news:knivee$g69$1...@dont-email.me...
background checjs have nothing to do with rights they are to uphold the laws
that the mad and bad can't own guns, unless you beleive the should be able
to. Background checks by the NRA are to stop the bad joining their
organisation bu the oppose it gun ownership
>
that the mad and bad can't own guns, unless you beleive the should be able
to. Background checks by the NRA are to stop the bad joining their
organisation bu the oppose it gun ownership
>
Dechucka
May 22, 2013, 4:11:24 PM5/22/13
to
news:knivm3$hjn$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for
>>>>their
>>>>employees is what amazes me
>>>
>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>
>> and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back to
>> taking on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>
>
> You really are stupid
> One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.
?
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for
>>>>their
>>>>employees is what amazes me
>>>
>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>
>> and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back to
>> taking on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>
>
> You really are stupid
> One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.
>
Trevor Wilson
May 22, 2013, 4:37:54 PM5/22/13
to
On 22/05/2013 3:43 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 22/05/2013 2:33 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 22/05/2013 2:33 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>>> "Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for their
>>>> employees is what amazes me
>>>
>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>>
>>
>>>> employees is what amazes me
>>>
>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>>
>>
>> **That is precisely why we have a Democracy, you nong. If a government
>> oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out.
>
> LOL. Unreal.
**It's a fact, nong.
>> oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out.
>
> LOL. Unreal.
>
>> As for gun control laws, the
>> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>
> And you're just a narrow-minded fuckwit.
>
NOT!
I was right in calling you a nong.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Je�us
May 22, 2013, 5:33:10 PM5/22/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 06:37:54 +1000, Trevor Wilson
Yeah, in your fantasy world.
>>> As for gun control laws, the
>>> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>>> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>
>> And you're just a narrow-minded fuckwit.
>>
>
>**You have some compelling, logical arguments.
>
>NOT!
>
>I was right in calling you a nong.
And you're just a narrow minded fuckwit.
And rather naive into the bargain.
>>> As for gun control laws, the
>>> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>>> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>
>> And you're just a narrow-minded fuckwit.
>>
>
>**You have some compelling, logical arguments.
>
>NOT!
>
>I was right in calling you a nong.
And rather naive into the bargain.
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 9:48:08 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yvWdneW6X8vsuwDM...@westnet.com.au...
TOo bad that the bad and mad get most of their guns from other sources than
the ones that require background checks
It should also be noted that none of the recent "bad and mad" had any
problems getting their guns for the following reasons
- Lanza committed murder to get his guns - NO BGC
- THe others passed their BGC because the system failed..
Adding more BGC when the current system is failing is not going to change
ANYTHIG AT ALL except continue to delude the delusional idiots ( like you )
you fail to grasp the fatal flaw of such laws.
THEY DO NOT WORK for criminals who don't give a shit about respecting
laws.
> unless you beleive the should be able to.
anything
> Background checks by the NRA are to stop the bad joining their
> organisation bu the oppose it gun ownership
>
The NRA has NO DUTY to enforce the 2nd Amendment
They have EVERY RIGHT to vet any and ALL of their employees. And doing so
has NOTHING to do with "gun ownership"..
But hey, as usual, don't let the facts get in the way of your ignorant
positions.
SaPeIsMa
May 22, 2013, 9:48:29 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:BuydnRdnCr4buwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knivm3$hjn$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knivm3$hjn$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for
>>>>>their
>>>>>employees is what amazes me
>>>>
>>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>>
>>> and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back to
>>> taking on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>>
>>
>> You really are stupid
>> One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.
>
> ?
>>
QED...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>the total hypocrisy of the NRA IF they insist on background checks for
>>>>>their
>>>>>employees is what amazes me
>>>>
>>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the distinction
>>>> between the two situations (particularly in the American context).
>>>> Some people are wise enough to know that historically, a government,
>>>> *any* government, cannot be trusted in the long term if the public are
>>>> either unarmed or are subjected to exactly what is/has been happening
>>>> in recent years re: 'gun control'.
>>>
>>> and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back to
>>> taking on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>>
>>
>> You really are stupid
>> One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.
>
> ?
>>
Scout
May 22, 2013, 10:47:48 PM5/22/13
to
news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
I never said just at the pub, but that's certainly one place you could do
it.
Tanks without crews are just oversized lawn ornaments.
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
it.
Tanks without crews are just oversized lawn ornaments.
Scout
May 22, 2013, 10:48:06 PM5/22/13
to
news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
Really?
Why not?
Why not?
Scout
May 22, 2013, 10:50:03 PM5/22/13
to
news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
A tank? Not smart. A tank's crewmember however......
Scout
May 22, 2013, 10:51:09 PM5/22/13
to
news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
Yea, and he made it clear that his target was the crew.....while OUTSIDE the
tank.
You never seemed to be able to accept the idea that crew members aren't
welded into their tank and live their for their entire term of service.
tank.
You never seemed to be able to accept the idea that crew members aren't
welded into their tank and live their for their entire term of service.
F Murtz
May 22, 2013, 11:45:39 PM5/22/13
to
Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 22/05/2013 2:33 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On 22/05/2013 2:33 PM, Je�us wrote:
> **That is precisely why we have a Democracy, you nong. If a government
> oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out. As for gun control laws, the
> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws.
Proves absolutely nothing.
> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws.
parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
majority wants.How many wanted the sale of profitable government
enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
does not validate everything they do
Scout
May 23, 2013, 12:12:09 AM5/23/13
to
"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:knk349$16r$1...@dont-email.me...
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 1:07:52 AM5/23/13
to
1996 gun control laws.
> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
> majority wants.
How many wanted the sale of profitable government
> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
> does not validate everything they do
Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
> Only
>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
the 1996 gun control laws.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 1:10:15 AM5/23/13
to
The Commonwealth Banking Corporation.
Energy Australia.
Telstra.
All have been since sold.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 1:16:48 AM5/23/13
to
news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me...
LOL murdering tank crews in the pub won't stop the US government stopping
nutty terrorist
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
nutty terrorist
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 1:17:43 AM5/23/13
to
news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
lol "A" crew member will stop the army
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 1:18:27 AM5/23/13
to
news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
lots of crews and the police take a poor view of murder
>
>
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>
>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 1:22:31 AM5/23/13
to
news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
cool how many crew are you going to take out :-)
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 1:23:54 AM5/23/13
to
news:knjsdh$7gt$1...@dont-email.me...
your fucked laws next
snip
snip
F Murtz
May 23, 2013, 1:48:26 AM5/23/13
to
Why do you think we are having so much trouble with electricity, they
ripped the adequate profits they were making away for other things
instead of maintaining plant.
GOP_Decline_and_Fall
May 23, 2013, 1:52:41 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 20:48:08 -0500, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>- Lanza committed murder to get his guns
A myth.
As per NRA advice the household guns were stored in his bedroom.
wrote:
>- Lanza committed murder to get his guns
As per NRA advice the household guns were stored in his bedroom.
F Murtz
May 23, 2013, 1:55:08 AM5/23/13
to
The people may have been totaslly disinterested in the subject and re
elected them for different reasons.
No proof whatever
>
>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
>> majority wants.
>
> **Such as?
How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>> does not validate everything they do
>
>
> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>> does not validate everything they do
>
> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
Proves no such thing, may not have been interested either way and not
>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
>> majority wants.
>
> **Such as?
How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>> does not validate everything they do
>
>
> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>> does not validate everything they do
>
> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
considered it a reason to vote them out.
Scout
May 23, 2013, 2:19:28 AM5/23/13
to
news:P4ednctM6-7LOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
Hmm.. and when the federal government has no one left willing or able to do
anything about nutty terrorists....then what?
I suppose the federal government will just run some off in their cloning
factory?
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
anything about nutty terrorists....then what?
I suppose the federal government will just run some off in their cloning
factory?
Scout
May 23, 2013, 2:20:11 AM5/23/13
to
news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
1 here, 1 there, 6 over here, a dozen there and eventually there isn't
enough left to stop anyone.
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
enough left to stop anyone.
Scout
May 23, 2013, 2:21:18 AM5/23/13
to
news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
I'm sure they will....but they always have a choice to stop supporting a
tyrannical government and start fulfilling their oath to the Constitution
instead.
Of course, that's going to leave the government with even less people to
support it's tyranny.
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
tyrannical government and start fulfilling their oath to the Constitution
instead.
Of course, that's going to leave the government with even less people to
support it's tyranny.
Scout
May 23, 2013, 2:22:09 AM5/23/13
to
news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
Wouldn't you like to know.
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
Scout
May 23, 2013, 2:23:16 AM5/23/13
to
"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message
news:ojbrp8h6ntiqnng4m...@4ax.com...
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 2:44:17 AM5/23/13
to
>>> You never seemed to be able to accept the idea that crew members aren't
>>> welded into their tank and live their for their entire term of service.
>>
>> LOL murdering tank crews in the pub won't stop the US government stopping
>> nutty terrorist
>
> Hmm.. and when the federal government has no one left willing or able to
> do anything about nutty terrorists....then what?
Syria looks an option
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 2:45:08 AM5/23/13
to
news:knkc84$21b$1...@dont-email.me...
LOL as you tell them from Gitmo
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 2:53:05 AM5/23/13
to
snip
>>> Why not?
>>
>> lots of crews and the police take a poor view of murder
>
> I'm sure they will....but they always have a choice to stop supporting a
> tyrannical government and start fulfilling their oath to the Constitution
> instead.
>
> Of course, that's going to leave the government with even less people to
> support it's tyranny.
>
>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 2:53:46 AM5/23/13
to
news:knkcbr$2ea$1...@dont-email.me...
Typical comment from a terrorist
>
>
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>
>
bringyagrogalong
May 23, 2013, 6:56:12 AM5/23/13
to
"Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:=
>
> Is there such a thing as a profitable government enterprise?
The governments in the oil rich Middle East certainly think so.
> Is there such a thing as a profitable government enterprise?
Klaus Schadenfreude
May 23, 2013, 8:04:00 AM5/23/13
to
On Wed, 22 May 2013 22:52:41 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall
<D...@null.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 20:48:08 -0500, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>- Lanza committed murder to get his guns
>
>A myth.
Really? Let's see a cite on that.
<D...@null.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 22 May 2013 20:48:08 -0500, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>- Lanza committed murder to get his guns
>
>A myth.
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:14:37 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
streets
They effectively stopped Soviet tanks long enough to let freedom fighters
lob Molotov Cocktails at them, or spike their tracks.
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:15:50 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
And you imagine that would be meaningful if there was civil insurrection
where the military and police are being targeted by insurgents ?
Are you really this much of a bleating sheeple ?
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:18:46 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f6dnf4ofK11IQDM...@westnet.com.au...
"puny guns".
\
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:19:37 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
For example, if you take out the drivers, you have reduced the effectiveness
of that tank to less than 50%
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:20:50 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NZidnXWjLqiMIADM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knkcbr$2ea$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:knkcbr$2ea$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>
A clear sign that he's way beyond his intellectual skill set.
SaPeIsMa
May 23, 2013, 10:25:21 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U_idnSF8ZKqdNQDM...@westnet.com.au...
RD Sandman
May 23, 2013, 12:08:48 PM5/23/13
to
GOP_Decline_and_Fall <D...@null.net> wrote in
news:ojbrp8h6ntiqnng4m...@4ax.com:
Hmmmm, the NRA knew Adam and told his mum to store the guns in his bedroom?
Sounds a tad farfetched to me.
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
news:ojbrp8h6ntiqnng4m...@4ax.com:
Sounds a tad farfetched to me.
--
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman
You can be young without money, but you
can't be old without it.
RD Sandman
May 23, 2013, 12:10:48 PM5/23/13
to
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me:
> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
surface every four years to allow the crew to re-enlist.
news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me:
> news:GLWdnY9_b8jpuQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:7217c46b-e8fb-4a8b...@a9g2000pbq.googlegroups.
>>>>>> Nothing hypocritical about it. You don't understand the
>>>>>> distinction between the two situations (particularly in the
>>>>>> American context). Some people are wise enough to know that
>>>>>> historically, a government, *any* government, cannot be trusted
>>>>>> in the long term if the public are either unarmed or are
>>>>>> subjected to exactly what is/has been happening in recent years
>>>>>> re: 'gun control'.
>>>>>
>>>>>and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back
>>>>>to taking
>>>>>on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>>>>
>>>>>> distinction between the two situations (particularly in the
>>>>>> American context). Some people are wise enough to know that
>>>>>> historically, a government, *any* government, cannot be trusted
>>>>>> in the long term if the public are either unarmed or are
>>>>>> subjected to exactly what is/has been happening in recent years
>>>>>> re: 'gun control'.
>>>>>
>>>>>and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back
>>>>>to taking
>>>>>on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope
>>>>
>>>> There's always this approach as well of course:
>>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d8/Tianasquare.jpg/
>>>> 300px-Tianasquare.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> Which sometimes results in this
>>>
>>> http://abettingman.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tiananmen-square-massa
>>> cre-tank-blood.jpg
>>>
>>> But the silly argument that anyone would stand up to a tank with a
>>> .22 pistol is typical of the nonsense that dechucklehead posts
>>
>>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d8/Tianasquare.jpg/
>>>> 300px-Tianasquare.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> Which sometimes results in this
>>>
>>> http://abettingman.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tiananmen-square-massa
>>> cre-tank-blood.jpg
>>>
>>> But the silly argument that anyone would stand up to a tank with a
>>> .22 pistol is typical of the nonsense that dechucklehead posts
>>
>> this was a huge discussin in another thread where the claim was made
>> by ozarkheart
>
> Yea, and he made it clear that his target was the crew.....while
> OUTSIDE the tank.
>
>> by ozarkheart
>
> Yea, and he made it clear that his target was the crew.....while
> OUTSIDE the tank.
>
> You never seemed to be able to accept the idea that crew members
> aren't welded into their tank and live their for their entire term of
> service.
>
>
When the nuclear subs first came out the story was that they would only
> aren't welded into their tank and live their for their entire term of
> service.
>
>
surface every four years to allow the crew to re-enlist.
RD Sandman
May 23, 2013, 12:14:16 PM5/23/13
to
Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what
>> the majority wants.
>
> **Such as?
>
>
> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>> elected does not validate everything they do
>
were certifiably insane? Interesting feelings on your fellow countrymen.
news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> **That is precisely why we have a Democracy, you nong. If a
>>> government oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out. As for gun
>>> control laws, the continued re-election of the Howard government
>>> proves that the vast majority of Australians fully supported the
>>> 1996 gun control laws.
>>
>>
>> Proves absolutely nothing.
>
> **And yet, it does. It proves that Australians were not unhappy with
> the 1996 gun control laws.
Do they really have a choice?
>>> government oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out. As for gun
>>> control laws, the continued re-election of the Howard government
>>> proves that the vast majority of Australians fully supported the
>>> 1996 gun control laws.
>>
>>
>> Proves absolutely nothing.
>
> **And yet, it does. It proves that Australians were not unhappy with
> the 1996 gun control laws.
>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what
>> the majority wants.
>
> **Such as?
>
>
> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>> elected does not validate everything they do
>
> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>
> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>
>> Only
>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>
> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected
> to the 1996 gun control laws.
In your opinion then, anyone who objected to the 1996 gun control laws
>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>
> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected
> to the 1996 gun control laws.
were certifiably insane? Interesting feelings on your fellow countrymen.
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 4:13:23 PM5/23/13
to
news:knl82v$c67$2...@dont-email.me...
Not sure they would be sitting at the pub for you to wipe out the entire
tank corp
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>>
tank corp
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 4:14:30 PM5/23/13
to
news:knl8i6$eqf$1...@dont-email.me...
you are the one suggesting a casmpaign of terror against tank crew
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:NZidnXWjLqiMIADM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knkcbr$2ea$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:NZidnXWjLqiMIADM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knkcbr$2ea$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 4:14:56 PM5/23/13
to
news:knl8aj$dck$2...@dont-email.me...
How?
>
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvpu$jqe$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:faadnbClvIHewAHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>
>
>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 4:18:48 PM5/23/13
to
news:knl82u$c67$1...@dont-email.me...
and the result of that uprising was what?
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$kb6$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>> news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 4:21:19 PM5/23/13
to
news:knl8ai$dck$1...@dont-email.me...
probably because they realise the cost in the loss of life, in injuries and
in $s to the US economy
>
> \
in $s to the US economy
>
> \
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 5:02:33 PM5/23/13
to
On 23/05/2013 7:33 AM, Je�us wrote:
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 06:37:54 +1000, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 22/05/2013 3:43 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> **It's a fact, nong.
>
> Yeah, in your fantasy world.
**Then YOU tell us how you think our Democracy works. Take as much space
as you need.
>
>>>> As for gun control laws, the
>>>> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>>>> majority of Australians fully supported the 1996 gun control laws. Only
>>>
>>
>> **You have some compelling, logical arguments.
>>
>> NOT!
>>
>> I was right in calling you a nong.
>
> And you're just a narrow minded fuckwit.
> And rather naive into the bargain.
>
**I'm old enough to know how things work in the real world, rather than
in your delusional mind.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 06:37:54 +1000, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 22/05/2013 3:43 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>> **That is precisely why we have a Democracy, you nong. If a government
>>>> oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out.
>>>
>>> LOL. Unreal.
>>>> oversteps the boundaries, we vote them out.
>>>
>>
>> **It's a fact, nong.
>
> Yeah, in your fantasy world.
**Then YOU tell us how you think our Democracy works. Take as much space
as you need.
>
>>>> As for gun control laws, the
>>>> continued re-election of the Howard government proves that the vast
>>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>>
>>> And you're just a narrow-minded fuckwit.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **You have some compelling, logical arguments.
>>
>> NOT!
>>
>> I was right in calling you a nong.
>
> And you're just a narrow minded fuckwit.
> And rather naive into the bargain.
>
**I'm old enough to know how things work in the real world, rather than
in your delusional mind.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 5:05:46 PM5/23/13
to
On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
* Of course they have a choice. Elections occur every four years.
* Polls taken after then 1996 gun control laws revealed that around 90%
of Australians approved of the 1996 gun control laws.
>
>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what
>>> the majority wants.
>>
>> **Such as?
>>
>>
>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>>> elected does not validate everything they do
>>
>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>>
>>> Only
>>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>
>> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected
>> to the 1996 gun control laws.
>
> In your opinion then, anyone who objected to the 1996 gun control laws
> were certifiably insane? Interesting feelings on your fellow countrymen.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 5:27:40 PM5/23/13
to
(Singtel, et al).
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 5:58:24 PM5/23/13
to
> The people may have been totaslly disinterested in the subject and re
> elected them for different reasons.
>
> No proof whatever
**Read what I wrote. IF Australians were truly unhappy with Howard's gun
control laws, they would have kicked him out of office after his first term.
>>
>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
>>> majority wants.
>>
>> **Such as?
> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
> >> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
> >> does not validate everything they do
>>
>>
>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>>> does not validate everything they do
>>
>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>
> considered it a reason to vote them out.
**It proves EXACTLY what I stated.
>
>>
>>> Only
>>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>
>> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected to
>> the 1996 gun control laws.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Scout
May 23, 2013, 6:50:35 PM5/23/13
to
just 'puny guns'.
:-)
I could find a home for a nice complete 5" Naval turret system hopefully a
5"/62 Mk 45 Mod 4 complete with a selection of shells and perhaps three Mk41
VLS fully loaded with a selection of missiles in an equilateral triangle
about the 5" gun system, interspaced with MK 15 Phalanx for close in support
and defense. That would provide a nice 'ordinance' park with complete with
sidewalks and landscaping. Then we could place a squad of heavy tanks around
the perimeter to provide some mobile defense assets. All paid for by the
government naturally. :-)
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 7:10:18 PM5/23/13
to
news:knm695$sn6$1...@dont-email.me...
weapon the military hasaccess to
>
> I could find a home for a nice complete 5" Naval turret system hopefully a
> 5"/62 Mk 45 Mod 4 complete with a selection of shells and perhaps three
> Mk41 VLS fully loaded with a selection of missiles in an equilateral
> triangle about the 5" gun system, interspaced with MK 15 Phalanx for close
> in support and defense. That would provide a nice 'ordinance' park with
> complete with sidewalks and landscaping. Then we could place a squad of
> heavy tanks around the perimeter to provide some mobile defense assets.
> All paid for by the government naturally. :-)
that would keep your house safe
>
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl8ai$dck$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:3f6dnf4ofK11IQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> snip
>>>
>>>>>> Why not?
>>>>>
>>>>> lots of crews and the police take a poor view of murder
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure they will....but they always have a choice to stop supporting
>>>> a tyrannical government and start fulfilling their oath to the
>>>> Constitution instead.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, that's going to leave the government with even less people
>>>> to support it's tyranny.
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK we are talking a civil war, fA to do with your puny guns
>>
>>
>> Funny how the government is trying very hard to restrict access to those
>> "puny guns".
>
> That, or maybe advocating that the people should be able to have more than
> just 'puny guns'.
>
> :-)
exactly, if the constitution is sacrosanct surely you should be allowed any
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl8ai$dck$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:3f6dnf4ofK11IQDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> snip
>>>
>>>>>> Why not?
>>>>>
>>>>> lots of crews and the police take a poor view of murder
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure they will....but they always have a choice to stop supporting
>>>> a tyrannical government and start fulfilling their oath to the
>>>> Constitution instead.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, that's going to leave the government with even less people
>>>> to support it's tyranny.
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK we are talking a civil war, fA to do with your puny guns
>>
>>
>> Funny how the government is trying very hard to restrict access to those
>> "puny guns".
>
> That, or maybe advocating that the people should be able to have more than
> just 'puny guns'.
>
> :-)
weapon the military hasaccess to
>
> I could find a home for a nice complete 5" Naval turret system hopefully a
> 5"/62 Mk 45 Mod 4 complete with a selection of shells and perhaps three
> Mk41 VLS fully loaded with a selection of missiles in an equilateral
> triangle about the 5" gun system, interspaced with MK 15 Phalanx for close
> in support and defense. That would provide a nice 'ordinance' park with
> complete with sidewalks and landscaping. Then we could place a squad of
> heavy tanks around the perimeter to provide some mobile defense assets.
> All paid for by the government naturally. :-)
Gray Guest
May 23, 2013, 7:43:50 PM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:R_adnWzAfN9KSQbM...@westnet.com.au:
Why? they are trying to keep you idiot infiltrators out.
--
Refusenik #1
Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.
Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama
news:R_adnWzAfN9KSQbM...@westnet.com.au:
--
Refusenik #1
Libs suffer from Eleutherophobia. And there is no cure.
Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden. When the SEALs called Obama,
THEY GOT DENIED. Fuck Obama
Dechucka
May 23, 2013, 7:53:01 PM5/23/13
to
"Gray Guest" <No_email...@wahoo.com> wrote in message
news:XnsA1C9C97541A9DWe...@78.46.70.116...
Giant hypocrisy on their part
RD Sandman
May 23, 2013, 10:43:50 PM5/23/13
to
Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what
>>>> the majority wants.
>>>
>>> **Such as?
>>>
>>>
>>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>>>> elected does not validate everything they do
>>>
>>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>>>
>>>> Only
>>>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>>
>>> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected
>>> to the 1996 gun control laws.
>>
>> In your opinion then, anyone who objected to the 1996 gun control
>> laws were certifiably insane? Interesting feelings on your fellow
>> countrymen.
>
> **Just the facts.
>
>
--
Trevor Wilson
May 23, 2013, 11:00:57 PM5/23/13
to
On 24/05/2013 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
historical facts though:
The same government that brought about the 1996 gun control laws, led by
the same Prime Minister, was re-elected 4 times (after those laws were
enacted).
>
>>>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what
>>>>> the majority wants.
>>>>
>>>> **Such as?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>>>>> elected does not validate everything they do
>>>>
>>>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>>>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>>>>
>>>>> Only
>>>>>> a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.
>>>>
>>>> **Yep. An insignificant number of certifiably insane people objected
>>>> to the 1996 gun control laws.
>>>
>>> In your opinion then, anyone who objected to the 1996 gun control
>>> laws were certifiably insane? Interesting feelings on your fellow
>>> countrymen.
>>
>> **Just the facts.
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Scout
May 23, 2013, 11:58:42 PM5/23/13
to
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1C9C8C2D...@216.196.121.131...
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
> news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
recently saw for anti-gun legislation with vast opposition.
Trevor Wilson
May 24, 2013, 12:26:20 AM5/24/13
to
F Murtz
May 24, 2013, 4:21:37 AM5/24/13
to
gun laws but thought it not much consequence compared with other
things, not everybody is obsessed as you about a subject with as little
consequence on the total homicide numbers
>
>>>
>>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
>>>> majority wants.
>>>
>>> **Such as?
>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> >> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>> elected
>> >> does not validate everything they do
>>>
>>>
>>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>>>> does not validate everything they do
>>>
>>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
Not proveable by election results.
>>>
>>>> parties are routinely re elected when they do the opposite to what the
>>>> majority wants.
>>>
>>> **Such as?
>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>> >> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is
>> elected
>> >> does not validate everything they do
>>>
>>>
>>> How many wanted the sale of profitable government
>>>> enterprises, happens all the time, and just because a party is elected
>>>> does not validate everything they do
>>>
>>> **I never claimed it did. What it does prove is that the majority of
>>> Australians were not unhappy with the 1996 gun control laws.
>>
>> Proves no such thing, may not have been interested either way and not
>> considered it a reason to vote them out.
>
> **It proves EXACTLY what I stated.
ROT. not proveable by election results.
>> Proves no such thing, may not have been interested either way and not
>> considered it a reason to vote them out.
>
> **It proves EXACTLY what I stated.
RD Sandman
May 24, 2013, 2:54:25 PM5/24/13
to
Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
news:b083fj...@mid.individual.net:
> On 24/05/2013 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>> news:b07elg...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> On 24/05/2013 2:14 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>> news:b05mhe...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>
>>>>> On 23/05/2013 1:45 PM, F Murtz wrote:
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>> On 22/05/2013 2:33 PM, Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:7217c46b-e8fb-4a8b-9252-9b027c59f4d9
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
@a9g2000pbq.googlegroups
>>>>>>>>> .c om...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On May 21, 6:31 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> news:c3017d09-85dd-4656-8bdb-ad88a12e5811
>>>>>>>>> .c om...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On May 21, 6:31 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Poof" <jmcch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>
addresses cultural differences between the two countries.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages