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 Historical content remains viewable.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

22 views
Skip to first unread message

Dechucka

unread,
May 20, 2013, 7:35:26 PM5/20/13
to
Heard this on the radio but can't believe it is true

Dechucka

unread,
May 21, 2013, 4:10:41 PM5/21/13
to

"Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7217c46b-e8fb-4a8b...@a9g2000pbq.googlegroups.com...
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.

================================

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

unread,
May 21, 2013, 9:59:28 PM5/21/13
to
More white noise. Nobody cares how 'amazed' you might be.

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

unread,
May 21, 2013, 10:03:53 PM5/21/13
to

"Poof" <jmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
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

Je�us

unread,
May 22, 2013, 12:33:22 AM5/22/13
to
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'.

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 12:39:58 AM5/22/13
to

"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
and the populous will take on the government. We're not going back to taking
on tanks with .22 pistols again I hope

Je�us

unread,
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

Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:31:39 AM5/22/13
to
**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. Only
a miniscule number of raving loonies objected to those laws.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Je�us

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:43:08 AM5/22/13
to
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.

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:42:58 AM5/22/13
to

"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
done without guns

Je�us

unread,
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.

Scout

unread,
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
Na, just taking on the crew outside of their tanks will be enough.


Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:50:52 AM5/22/13
to

"Jeßus" <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:
>
if the big bad goverement is coming to get the yanks their weaponery will
make fuck all difference

Dechucka

unread,
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
LOL we've been through this and your best idea was murdering the crews down
the pub
>
>

Je�us

unread,
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
Hey, if it works...

Je�us

unread,
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
>news:0lmop8h9d6gnle4mr...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:31:39 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
I'll have to disagree with that. It would make all the difference.

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 2:21:19 AM5/22/13
to

"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
it wouldn't

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 2:22:13 AM5/22/13
to

"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
news:0joop8ptf39dnm9ea...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:50:52 +1000, "Dechucka"
> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
we'll have to agree to disagree

Je�us

unread,
May 22, 2013, 2:30:07 AM5/22/13
to
One could at least make them ill by shouting them a tooheys, VB or
XXXX...

keithr

unread,
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
Americans don't bother to vote would seem to indicate that they don't
give a flying fuck either way.

bringyagrogalong

unread,
May 22, 2013, 7:27:53 AM5/22/13
to
Part of the reason for that, is that the ruling elite have forced
people to vote on a Tuesday when most people are working and
struggling to get home.

Civilised countries vote on a Saturday.

Klaus Schadenfreude

unread,
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.

[chuckle]

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 8:38:42 AM5/22/13
to

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:r9epp8h52ovpm2ufh...@4ax.com...
yep 2ST a caller was talking about an article by Fitzsimmons (sic) in one of
the papers
>
> [chuckle]
>

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:35:05 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ItOdnSA6lP8_ugHM...@westnet.com.au...
Really ?
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

unread,
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
You really are stupid
One has to wonder why you need to keep proving it.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:42:22 PM5/22/13
to
"Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
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
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

SaPeIsMa

unread,
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:
>>
Well naturally, because you're stupid enough to presume that the government
has an advantage and a cowed pack of subjects like you..

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 22, 2013, 1:48:44 PM5/22/13
to
"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
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.


Je�us

unread,
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
>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
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.

Je�us

unread,
May 22, 2013, 3:48:37 PM5/22/13
to
Add that, voting is compulsory in Australia. Now imagine if it
wasn't... what sort of voter turnout would we have? I'd wager it'd be
very similar to the USAians.

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 4:02:34 PM5/22/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
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
this was a huge discussin in another thread where the claim was made by
ozarkheart
>

Je�us

unread,
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
>> 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
Well it was a bloody stupid thing to use in this thread, given the
context you used it in.

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 4:11:03 PM5/22/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
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

>

Dechucka

unread,
May 22, 2013, 4:11:24 PM5/22/13
to

"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...
>>
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>> 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.

?
>

Trevor Wilson

unread,
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 06:10:41 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> 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'.
>>>
>>
>> **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.

>
>> 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.

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Je�us

unread,
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.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 22, 2013, 9:48:08 PM5/22/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yvWdneW6X8vsuwDM...@westnet.com.au...
At least that is the theory
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.

SInce current BGC fail to work, I don't beliave that MORE BGC will solve
anything

> Background checks by the NRA are to stop the bad joining their
> organisation bu the oppose it gun ownership
>

Try again stupid
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

unread,
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
>>> 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...

Scout

unread,
May 22, 2013, 10:47:48 PM5/22/13
to


"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
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

unread,
May 22, 2013, 10:48:06 PM5/22/13
to


"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
Really?

Why not?


Scout

unread,
May 22, 2013, 10:50:03 PM5/22/13
to


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knivto$j6c$1...@dont-email.me...
A tank? Not smart. A tank's crewmember however......



Scout

unread,
May 22, 2013, 10:51:09 PM5/22/13
to


"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
>> 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
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.


F Murtz

unread,
May 22, 2013, 11:45:39 PM5/22/13
to
Trevor Wilson 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.
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

unread,
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...
Is there such a thing as a profitable government enterprise?

Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:07:52 AM5/23/13
to
**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.

> 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

Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:10:15 AM5/23/13
to
**Here in Australia, certainly. Here's a few:

The Commonwealth Banking Corporation.
Energy Australia.
Telstra.

All have been since sold.




--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:16:48 AM5/23/13
to

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:knk007$kg7$1...@dont-email.me...
LOL murdering tank crews in the pub won't stop the US government stopping
nutty terrorist

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:17:43 AM5/23/13
to

"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:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
lol "A" crew member will stop the army

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:18:27 AM5/23/13
to

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
lots of crews and the police take a poor view of murder
>
>

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:22:31 AM5/23/13
to

"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
cool how many crew are you going to take out :-)

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:23:54 AM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knjsdh$7gt$1...@dont-email.me...
your fucked laws next

snip

F Murtz

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:48:26 AM5/23/13
to
Most of the ones they have been selling.
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

unread,
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.

F Murtz

unread,
May 23, 2013, 1:55:08 AM5/23/13
to
It does no such thing.
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
considered it a reason to vote them out.

Scout

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:19:28 AM5/23/13
to


"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
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

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:20:11 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
>>> 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
1 here, 1 there, 6 over here, a dozen there and eventually there isn't
enough left to stop anyone.


Scout

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:21:18 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$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$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
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

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:22:09 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
Wouldn't you like to know.


Scout

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:23:16 AM5/23/13
to


"GOP_Decline_and_Fall" <D...@null.net> wrote in message
news:ojbrp8h6ntiqnng4m...@4ax.com...
Cite that advice.


Dechucka

unread,
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?

the anarchists take over the South rises again under a "government"

Syria looks an option

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:45:08 AM5/23/13
to

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:knkc84$21b$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$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:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
LOL as you tell them from Gitmo

Dechucka

unread,
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.
>

OK we are talking a civil war, fA to do with your puny guns
>

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 2:53:46 AM5/23/13
to

"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
Typical comment from a terrorist
>
>

bringyagrogalong

unread,
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.

Klaus Schadenfreude

unread,
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.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
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
>>> 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
In Budapest in 1956, people painted washbasins and laid them out in the
streets
They effectively stopped Soviet tanks long enough to let freedom fighters
lob Molotov Cocktails at them, or spike their tracks.




SaPeIsMa

unread,
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$1...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:knhltq$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
LOL

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

unread,
May 23, 2013, 10:18:46 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f6dnf4ofK11IQDM...@westnet.com.au...
Funny how the government is trying very hard to restrict access to those
"puny guns".

\

SaPeIsMa

unread,
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
You don't even have to take out the whole crew
For example, if you take out the drivers, you have reduced the effectiveness
of that tank to less than 50%



SaPeIsMa

unread,
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
Oh dear, dechucklehead is now reduced to accusing people of being terrorists
A clear sign that he's way beyond his intellectual skill set.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 23, 2013, 10:25:21 AM5/23/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U_idnSF8ZKqdNQDM...@westnet.com.au...
Is that supposed to mean something ?

RD Sandman

unread,
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.

RD Sandman

unread,
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:

>
>
> "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
>>> 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
>>>>>news:27iop85j10jbv2be5...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>
>> 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.
>
> 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
surface every four years to allow the crew to re-enlist.

RD Sandman

unread,
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:
>>> **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?

>> 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.

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:13:23 PM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knl82v$c67$2...@dont-email.me...
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:knhltq$ks4$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:TuKdnSsWlOep0QHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
Not sure they would be sitting at the pub for you to wipe out the entire
tank corp

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:14:30 PM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knl8i6$eqf$1...@dont-email.me...
> "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
you are the one suggesting a casmpaign of terror against tank crew

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:14:56 PM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knl8aj$dck$2...@dont-email.me...
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvpu$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
How?
>
>
>

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:18:48 PM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knl82u$c67$1...@dont-email.me...
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:knjvu5$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:arlop8hc7lqd8lqme...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 14:39:58 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Jeßus" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
and the result of that uprising was what?

Dechucka

unread,
May 23, 2013, 4:21:19 PM5/23/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
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
>
> \

Trevor Wilson

unread,
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:
>>>> **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.
>
> 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
>>>> 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

unread,
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:
**Points:

* 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.

**Just the facts.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 23, 2013, 5:27:40 PM5/23/13
to
**And half the industry in China and the biggest industries in Singapore
(Singtel, et al).

--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 23, 2013, 5:58:24 PM5/23/13
to
> It does no such thing.
> 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.
>
> 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.

>
>>
>>> 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.

**Only the clinically insane objected to the 1996 gun control laws.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Scout

unread,
May 23, 2013, 6:50:35 PM5/23/13
to


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knl8ai$dck$1...@dont-email.me...
That, or maybe advocating that the people should be able to have more than
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

unread,
May 23, 2013, 7:10:18 PM5/23/13
to

"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:knm695$sn6$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl8ai$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
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

Gray Guest

unread,
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

Dechucka

unread,
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...
but oppose background checks to stop the mad and the bad from having gun.
Giant hypocrisy on their part

RD Sandman

unread,
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:
Can you produce any of those polls?

>>>> 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

unread,
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:
**SEVETEEN year old polls? I doubt it. I will remind you of one
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.
>>
>>
>
>
>


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Scout

unread,
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:
I wonder if they used the same pollsters who came up with the 90% number we
recently saw for anti-gun legislation with vast opposition.


Trevor Wilson

unread,
May 24, 2013, 12:26:20 AM5/24/13
to
**Cite the AUSTRALIAN polls which came up with such numbers.


--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

F Murtz

unread,
May 24, 2013, 4:21:37 AM5/24/13
to
Still no proof whatever, they may have been extremly unhappy with his
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.
>>
>> 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.

RD Sandman

unread,
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
@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
No, you won't. We have been through all of this before and none of it
addresses cultural differences between the two countries.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:08:49 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:V6adnV30WKfj5QPM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl82v$c67$2...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Bq2dnaxKE94nOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knjvqg$jsd$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:jrOdnZXUw-xo_gHM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Je�us" <no...@all.org> wrote in message
>>>>> news:thoop8p46dekqt9bq...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 22 May 2013 15:52:45 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:knhltq$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
That's your strawman
I'll leave you to feed it.

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:09:24 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yrudnV-314Jd5QPM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl8i6$eqf$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "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
>> A clear sign that he's way beyond his intellectual skill set.
>>
>
> you are the one suggesting a casmpaign of terror against tank crew
>

Now you're just lying..

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:10:09 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:27ednU9aFuhG5QPM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl8aj$dck$2...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:TN6dnb0ciYcwOgDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knjvpu$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
DOH !
A driverless tank is an immobile tank..
That's called a sitting duck..

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:10:57 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wrKdnc1bY_he5APM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:knl82u$c67$1...@dont-email.me...
>> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:qu6dnVRxXqUQOwDM...@westnet.com.au...
>>>
>>> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:knjvu5$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
>>>>> 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
Change of subject noted.
That was not the subject of discussion

SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:13:52 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:XbGdnSCd4prH5wPM...@westnet.com.au...
Shit dedummy, cars cost a great deal more in lost life, injuries and
property damage
Don't see the government going after cars, do you ?
Hell, dedummy, the cost in lives, is even greater for the medical
profession, yet you don't see the government shutting that down ?

And if you try to argue social benefits for either of the above while
COMPLETELY IGNORING the social benefits of an armed society, then you will
once again prove yourself an intellectually dishonest hypocrite.



SaPeIsMa

unread,
May 25, 2013, 10:14:44 AM5/25/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pZ-dnULaUMBkNgPM...@westnet.com.au...
Since they don't and you lie about it,
You're just proving you're stupid and dishonest.



Dechucka

unread,
May 25, 2013, 3:50:35 PM5/25/13
to

"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:knqh17$rvq$3...@dont-email.me...
> "Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:XbGdnSCd4prH5wPM...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:knl8ai$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".
>>
>> probably because they realise the cost in the loss of life, in injuries
>> and in $s to the US economy
>
>
>
> Shit dedummy, cars cost a great deal more in lost life, injuries and
> property damage

straw man

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages