Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Boston Bombing, more people died that day from gun violence but ....
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Dechucka
Apr 18, 2013, 5:56:53 PM4/18/13
to
.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be passed.
Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
Julia...@alp.org.au
Apr 18, 2013, 6:07:03 PM4/18/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
rights to bear arms.
Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
deaths in Godz Own country!
http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
I have dealt with are friendly people.
(waiting for gun lovers to try to justify their existence .....)
>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
rights to bear arms.
Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
deaths in Godz Own country!
http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
I have dealt with are friendly people.
(waiting for gun lovers to try to justify their existence .....)
Dechucka
Apr 18, 2013, 6:21:47 PM4/18/13
to
<Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
checks
John
Apr 18, 2013, 11:35:44 PM4/18/13
to
Dechucka wrote:
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
You are an ignorant bastard, and you don't know what you are talking about.
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 1:04:16 AM4/19/13
to
On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
**Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures are.
They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Sanders Kaufman
Apr 19, 2013, 2:12:08 AM4/19/13
to
On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, Dechucka wrote:
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
Sanders Kaufman
Apr 19, 2013, 2:13:42 AM4/19/13
to
tinfoil beanie who gets a tingle up his leg when he sees Obama?
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 5:24:33 AM4/19/13
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <Sister...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
news:kkqnav$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
your ears and going ner ner doesn't change the situation
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 5:24:56 AM4/19/13
to
"John" <john...@oldwest.net> wrote in message
news:ONudnRB-BdMIJu3M...@earthlink.com...
really? why?
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 5:26:31 AM4/19/13
to
news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping guns
out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
bringyagrogalong
Apr 19, 2013, 6:14:14 AM4/19/13
to
fight.
When was the last time you used your fists you faggot?
bringyagrogalong
Apr 19, 2013, 6:16:25 AM4/19/13
to
--------------
"Canadian study shows that people of low intelligence gravitate
toward socially conservative ideologies."
http://tinyurl.com/7jb762o
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 19, 2013, 9:49:04 AM4/19/13
to
JohnJohnsn
Apr 19, 2013, 11:02:21 AM4/19/13
to
On Apr 19, 4:24 am, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>
>> What planet are you getting your news from Skippy? Maybe the guy in the
>> tinfoil beanie who gets a tingle up his leg when he sees Obama?
>
> Seem to know more about the situation than you do Putting your fingers in
> your ears and going ner ner doesn't change the situation
>
Well, "Dechucka": take your VLILLLDM fingers out of your VLILLLDM ears
and "hear" this:
The Boston Marathon bombers were MUSLIM EXTREMISTS!
Now we all know all you VLILLLDMs were hoping and praying that this
was done by some "Right-Wing Militia Gun Nutz," but, as usual, you
were WRONG!
The stories of 2 brothers suspected in bombing
By JEFF DONN and JOCELYN NOVECK | Associated Press – 28 mins ago
http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/381260562ae57d0d2f0f6a70670041c2.jpg
BOSTON (AP) — In May of 2011, Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, then a senior at a
prestigious high school, was awarded a $2,500 scholarship from the
city of Cambridge, Mass., to pursue higher education. Now, Tsarnaev is
on the run, described as "armed and dangerous" and suspected of the
Boston Marathon bombing.
Two brothers, one now dead, one alive and at large. After hours of
only grainy images of two men in baseball caps to go on, a portrait
gradually started emerging Friday of the men suspected in the attack.
Tsarnaev, 19, and his older brother, Tamerlan, who was killed during a
violent night in Cambridge, had been living together on Norfolk Street
in Cambridge. An uncle, Ruslan Tsarni of Montgomery Village, Md., told
The Associated Press that the men lived together near Boston and have
been in the United States for about a decade. They came from the
Russian region near Chechnya, which has been plagued by an Islamic
insurgency stemming from separatist wars.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's page on the Russian social networking site
Vkontakte says he attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin School,
graduating in 2011, the year he won the scholarship, which was
celebrated with a reception at City Hall, according to a news release
issued at the time. Before moving to the United States, he attended
School No. 1 in Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan, a predominantly
Muslim republic in Russia's North Caucasus that has become an
epicenter of the Islamic insurgency that spilled over from Chechnya.
On the site, he describes himself as speaking Chechen as well as
English and Russian. His world view is described as "Islam" and he
says his personal goal is "career and money."
Tsarnaev appeared in the video released by authorities on Thursday,
identified as Suspect Number 2, striding down a sidewalk, unnoticed by
spectators who were absorbed in the race. He followed Tamerlan by
about 10 feet. He wore what appeared to be a gray hoodie under a dark
jacket and pants, and a white baseball cap facing backward and pulled
down haphazardly.
Tamerlan was stockier, in khaki pants, a light T-shirt, and a dark
jacket. The brim of his baseball cap faced forward, and he may have
been wearing sunglasses.
According to the website spotcrime.com, Tamerlan was arrested for
domestic violence in July 2009, after assaulting his girlfriend.
He was an amateur boxer, listed as a competitor in a National Golden
Gloves competition in 2009.
http://news.yahoo.com/stories-2-brothers-suspected-bombing-124623274.html
>
>
>"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqnav$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>
>> On 4/18/2013 3:21 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>
>>> "Lyin' Aussie Julia" <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>
>> On 4/18/2013 3:21 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>
>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
The Boston Marathon violence was "bred" on foreign shores, Julia.
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>
>> What planet are you getting your news from Skippy? Maybe the guy in the
>> tinfoil beanie who gets a tingle up his leg when he sees Obama?
>
> Seem to know more about the situation than you do Putting your fingers in
> your ears and going ner ner doesn't change the situation
>
and "hear" this:
The Boston Marathon bombers were MUSLIM EXTREMISTS!
Now we all know all you VLILLLDMs were hoping and praying that this
was done by some "Right-Wing Militia Gun Nutz," but, as usual, you
were WRONG!
The stories of 2 brothers suspected in bombing
By JEFF DONN and JOCELYN NOVECK | Associated Press – 28 mins ago
http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/381260562ae57d0d2f0f6a70670041c2.jpg
BOSTON (AP) — In May of 2011, Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, then a senior at a
prestigious high school, was awarded a $2,500 scholarship from the
city of Cambridge, Mass., to pursue higher education. Now, Tsarnaev is
on the run, described as "armed and dangerous" and suspected of the
Boston Marathon bombing.
Two brothers, one now dead, one alive and at large. After hours of
only grainy images of two men in baseball caps to go on, a portrait
gradually started emerging Friday of the men suspected in the attack.
Tsarnaev, 19, and his older brother, Tamerlan, who was killed during a
violent night in Cambridge, had been living together on Norfolk Street
in Cambridge. An uncle, Ruslan Tsarni of Montgomery Village, Md., told
The Associated Press that the men lived together near Boston and have
been in the United States for about a decade. They came from the
Russian region near Chechnya, which has been plagued by an Islamic
insurgency stemming from separatist wars.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's page on the Russian social networking site
Vkontakte says he attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin School,
graduating in 2011, the year he won the scholarship, which was
celebrated with a reception at City Hall, according to a news release
issued at the time. Before moving to the United States, he attended
School No. 1 in Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan, a predominantly
Muslim republic in Russia's North Caucasus that has become an
epicenter of the Islamic insurgency that spilled over from Chechnya.
On the site, he describes himself as speaking Chechen as well as
English and Russian. His world view is described as "Islam" and he
says his personal goal is "career and money."
Tsarnaev appeared in the video released by authorities on Thursday,
identified as Suspect Number 2, striding down a sidewalk, unnoticed by
spectators who were absorbed in the race. He followed Tamerlan by
about 10 feet. He wore what appeared to be a gray hoodie under a dark
jacket and pants, and a white baseball cap facing backward and pulled
down haphazardly.
Tamerlan was stockier, in khaki pants, a light T-shirt, and a dark
jacket. The brim of his baseball cap faced forward, and he may have
been wearing sunglasses.
According to the website spotcrime.com, Tamerlan was arrested for
domestic violence in July 2009, after assaulting his girlfriend.
He was an amateur boxer, listed as a competitor in a National Golden
Gloves competition in 2009.
http://news.yahoo.com/stories-2-brothers-suspected-bombing-124623274.html
bringyagrogalong
Apr 19, 2013, 11:13:43 AM4/19/13
to
JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> >> Dechucka wrote:
> "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> >>> <Julia.l...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
> >>>> Dechucka stated:-
>
> >>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> >>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
> >>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
> >>>> rights to bear arms.
>
> >>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
> The Boston Marathon violence was "bred" on foreign shores, Julia.
Who cares!
>
> >>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> >>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
> >>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
> >>>> rights to bear arms.
>
> >>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
> The Boston Marathon violence was "bred" on foreign shores, Julia.
I'd be more concerned about the number of Americans killed by fellow
gun-totting Americans.
hmmm! I wonder if the NRA has been infiltrated by Al-Qaeda?
Let's face it, the NRA is responsible for more American deaths than
any act of terrorism.
In fact more than a million since John Lennon was shot to death.
Al-Qaeda would kill for stats like that.
(pardon the pun)
JohnJohnsn
Apr 19, 2013, 11:17:20 AM4/19/13
to
On Apr 19, 4:26 am, Dechucka ltdechu <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
check" would "keep guns out of the hands of some criminals and
psychos."
Better yet, tell us how a "UBC" would "keep guns out of the hands of
ANY criminals or ANY psychos."
BTW, Dechucka; have you recovered yet from that bout you had with Mad
Cow Disease back in `04?
>
>
>"Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>
>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, wrote:
>
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>
> How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping
> guns out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
>
Clue us in, Dechucka: tell us _exactly_ how a "universal background
>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, wrote:
>
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>
> How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping
> guns out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
>
check" would "keep guns out of the hands of some criminals and
psychos."
Better yet, tell us how a "UBC" would "keep guns out of the hands of
ANY criminals or ANY psychos."
BTW, Dechucka; have you recovered yet from that bout you had with Mad
Cow Disease back in `04?
Bert
Apr 19, 2013, 2:14:07 PM4/19/13
to
In
news:33c2ebb8-a1b1-40b6...@i20g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
What are you afraid of? You think that arming your potential victims
might cut into your trade?
--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN
news:33c2ebb8-a1b1-40b6...@i20g2000pbq.googlegroups.com
bringyagrogalong <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> The "effeminate cunts" are the gutless wonders who need a gun in a
> fight.
>
Another call for "fair play for thugs and murderers."
> The "effeminate cunts" are the gutless wonders who need a gun in a
> fight.
>
What are you afraid of? You think that arming your potential victims
might cut into your trade?
--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN
RD Sandman
Apr 19, 2013, 3:49:27 PM4/19/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:itSdncX3uaHGkOzM...@westnet.com.au:
Yes, there have been several polls where gun control laws like the
universal background check are favored by 90+% of the people. However,
if you look at the problems facing the country, gun control is rated
number one by about 4%. The top problems in the polls facing the country
are the debt, economy, healthcare and employment.
--
Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman)
news:itSdncX3uaHGkOzM...@westnet.com.au:
universal background check are favored by 90+% of the people. However,
if you look at the problems facing the country, gun control is rated
number one by about 4%. The top problems in the polls facing the country
are the debt, economy, healthcare and employment.
--
Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman)
RD Sandman
Apr 19, 2013, 3:50:56 PM4/19/13
to
Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
They are interested in re-election.
news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
RD Sandman
Apr 19, 2013, 3:55:14 PM4/19/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:svednasKjYVPkOzM...@westnet.com.au:
Some of those who were pushing for the universal background checks had
more in mind. Schumer, for example, wanted all paper on sale by
individuals to be kept like logs by dealers. That could lead to a
registration database inthe future. That caused a split between Schumer
and Coburn and sent Manchin and Toomey to continue on without him.
news:svednasKjYVPkOzM...@westnet.com.au:
more in mind. Schumer, for example, wanted all paper on sale by
individuals to be kept like logs by dealers. That could lead to a
registration database inthe future. That caused a split between Schumer
and Coburn and sent Manchin and Toomey to continue on without him.
keithr
Apr 19, 2013, 5:04:14 PM4/19/13
to
last night.
keithr
Apr 19, 2013, 5:04:30 PM4/19/13
to
On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
keithr
Apr 19, 2013, 5:06:09 PM4/19/13
to
On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
> are.
>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>
>
> They are interested in re-election.
>
and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
> are.
>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>
>
> They are interested in re-election.
>
who elected them.
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 5:22:37 PM4/19/13
to
wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to be
in peoples' interest?
--
Julia Gillard...
"I don't want the mining industry to hire a single foreign worker if
there is an Australian who can do the job"
(PS: Who issues the visas????????????????????)
"Wayne Swan was explicitly asked to rule out a further increase in the
debt limit above the current limit of $300 billion. He steadfastly refused".
http://liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/03/13/swan-refuses-rule-out-increase-debt-limit-above-300-billion
Swan...
"The course of action I'm talking about today really comes very much, I
guess, to the core of my values and the values of the Labor Party"
Paul Howes...
"Labor has an obligation to stop extremists who threaten our democracy"
How much new law is there every year?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lePrBUHihKI
Tony Abbott...
"You do not save the environment by killing the economy"
"It's not about popularity, it's about gaining respect, and she hasn't
got it yet"
(Australian of the Year, 2013)
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 5:28:06 PM4/19/13
to
will have a million CCTV cameras per square mile/kilometre before they
admit that monitoring the general population is a waste of time. In the
process they will dream up all sorts of reasons to maintain their
surveillance of the general population.
Of course terrs and crims will easily evade all of their measures.
Stupidity is inherently self-limiting.
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 19, 2013, 6:26:26 PM4/19/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:04:14 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
wrote:
Why would they be "gutless?" they have 90% of the population behind
them.
What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
wrote:
them.
What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 6:27:56 PM4/19/13
to
cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
been effectively neutralised.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 19, 2013, 6:31:20 PM4/19/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>**You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>been effectively neutralised.
Yes or no- did it stop the bombing?
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>**You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>been effectively neutralised.
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:32:44 PM4/19/13
to
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA1A78276...@216.196.121.131...
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:33:39 PM4/19/13
to
"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7qi2n81nvsn8nfv7g...@4ax.com...
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:34:21 PM4/19/13
to
news:g3h3n851jkognl3rl...@4ax.com...
Snows how gutless they are
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:39:07 PM4/19/13
to
news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
> are.
>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>
>
> They are interested in re-election.
sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
> are.
>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>
>
> They are interested in re-election.
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:39:53 PM4/19/13
to
"ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence" <bjfost...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
message news:atdqsq...@mid.individual.net...
> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>
>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>> are.
>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>
>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>> who elected them.
>
> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the wishes
> of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to be in
> peoples' interest?
read what he said slowly
>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>
>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>> are.
>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>
>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>> who elected them.
>
> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the wishes
> of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to be in
> peoples' interest?
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 6:43:12 PM4/19/13
to
message news:atdr73...@mid.individual.net...
wee caught on CCTV
> On 20/04/2013 1:17 AM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>> On Apr 19, 4:26 am, Dechucka ltdechu <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
>>> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>>>
>>>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>>>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take
>>>> it
>>>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You
>>>> shouldn't
>>>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>>>
>>> How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping
>>> guns out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
>>>
>> Clue us in, Dechucka: tell us _exactly_ how a "universal background
>> check" would "keep guns out of the hands of some criminals and
>> psychos."
>>
>> Better yet, tell us how a "UBC" would "keep guns out of the hands of
>> ANY criminals or ANY psychos."
>>
>> BTW, Dechucka; have you recovered yet from that bout you had with Mad
>> Cow Disease back in `04?
>>
>
> Dumbfucka is a combination of ignorance and leftist control freak.
you coming out in favour of US gun laws are you? BTW the suspects in Boston
>> On Apr 19, 4:26 am, Dechucka ltdechu <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sanders Kaufman" <Sisterspl...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
>>> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>>>
>>>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>>>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take
>>>> it
>>>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You
>>>> shouldn't
>>>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>>>
>>> How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping
>>> guns out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
>>>
>> Clue us in, Dechucka: tell us _exactly_ how a "universal background
>> check" would "keep guns out of the hands of some criminals and
>> psychos."
>>
>> Better yet, tell us how a "UBC" would "keep guns out of the hands of
>> ANY criminals or ANY psychos."
>>
>> BTW, Dechucka; have you recovered yet from that bout you had with Mad
>> Cow Disease back in `04?
>>
>
> Dumbfucka is a combination of ignorance and leftist control freak.
wee caught on CCTV
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 6:47:08 PM4/19/13
to
"Any FUTURE attempts by the perps has been effectively neutralised."
Is that any clearer?
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 6:49:21 PM4/19/13
to
the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep those names in
mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 7:17:43 PM4/19/13
to
Scout
Apr 19, 2013, 7:27:58 PM4/19/13
to
"Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:ate000...@mid.individual.net...
to stay unless we have someone better.
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 7:29:38 PM4/19/13
to
message news:ate1ki...@mid.individual.net...
passed. You have a strange idea of democracy
> On 20/04/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>
>> "ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence" <bjfost...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
>> message news:atdqsq...@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>> are.
>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>
>>>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>>>> who elected them.
>>>
>>> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
>>> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to
>>> be in peoples' interest?
>>
>> read what he said slowly
>
> Duh dat wot happen in a duh-mocracy, duh-chuckah
That there is 90% support for background checks and that simple law is not
>>
>> "ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence" <bjfost...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
>> message news:atdqsq...@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>> are.
>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>
>>>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>>>> who elected them.
>>>
>>> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
>>> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to
>>> be in peoples' interest?
>>
>> read what he said slowly
>
> Duh dat wot happen in a duh-mocracy, duh-chuckah
passed. You have a strange idea of democracy
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 7:31:47 PM4/19/13
to
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:kksjok$142$2...@dont-email.me...
of the hands of people the law says shouldn't have them?
JohnJohnsn
Apr 19, 2013, 7:33:34 PM4/19/13
to
On Apr 19, 5:33 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>>><Julia.l...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
"populations {GIC} views," as they answer to the voters of their WHOLE
state and not just those of the "territoriality" of the relatively
small segment of the state's population; like US representatives do
(excepting "The Granola State," that is: who put `Daffy Dianne' and
`Baba Boxter' back in office again; and Again; and AGAIN!).
I predict that WVa voters will tell Joe Manchin _exactly_ what they
think about his role in "S/M/T" next time he's up for re-election.
>
>
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7qi2n81nvsn8nfv7g...@4ax.com...
>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>> <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>
>>><Julia.l...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>>news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>>and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>checks
>
>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>
> because the Senate is not representative of the populations views
>
Actually, the US senators are _more_ representative of their
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>>and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>checks
>
>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>
> because the Senate is not representative of the populations views
>
"populations {GIC} views," as they answer to the voters of their WHOLE
state and not just those of the "territoriality" of the relatively
small segment of the state's population; like US representatives do
(excepting "The Granola State," that is: who put `Daffy Dianne' and
`Baba Boxter' back in office again; and Again; and AGAIN!).
I predict that WVa voters will tell Joe Manchin _exactly_ what they
think about his role in "S/M/T" next time he's up for re-election.
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 7:34:20 PM4/19/13
to
On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>> been effectively neutralised.
I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras. There were
> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>> been effectively neutralised.
*particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects. I doubt
that anyone has an issue with surveillance cameras used by protective
forces under strict protocols.
Recall how John Howard tried to buy votes in Bennelong by promising to
install security cameras in Eastwood shopping centre? Eastwood is one f
the lowest crime places on the planet - and the high proportion of smart
ethnic Chinese people in the area didn't buy it. They gave him the flick
and voted for McKew.
Tell you leftist masters not to misuse state machinery to spy on the
general population - or they will suffer the same electoral fate as John
Howard.
Oh - they already are...
2PP: L-NP 55.5%, ALP 44.5%
>>
>> Yes or no- did it stop the bombing?
>>
>
> **Read my words, you fucking moron. Here, I'll repeat them for you:
>
> "Any FUTURE attempts by the perps has been effectively neutralised."
>
> Is that any clearer?
>
'PERPS' be prevented by any cameras?
BTW, the conviction is only possible with an eyewitness:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10005932/Boston-Marathon-victim-Jeff-Bauman-helped-identify-bombers.html
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 7:37:22 PM4/19/13
to
they will again face the electorate. Are you thick?
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 7:38:42 PM4/19/13
to
and the ones the opposed it
> need to stay unless we have someone better.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 7:39:37 PM4/19/13
to
On 4/20/2013 9:34 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>
> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
**Then I suggest you read or watch some news reports.
> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>
> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Scout
Apr 19, 2013, 7:44:35 PM4/19/13
to
news:ate2sh...@mid.individual.net...
Who said I do?
> and the ones the opposed it
>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>
> **You already have someone better.
Who would that be?
Particularly since no candidates have even announced their bids for the next
election cycle.
> and the ones the opposed it
>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>
> **You already have someone better.
Particularly since no candidates have even announced their bids for the next
election cycle.
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 7:48:59 PM4/19/13
to
<unsnip>
There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
I doubt that anyone has an issue with surveillance cameras used by
protective forces under strict protocols.
</unsnip>
I doubt that anyone has an issue with surveillance cameras used by
protective forces under strict protocols.
It is perfectly logical to mount cameras (or enable them) at such an
event and then disable them afterward. There is absolutely NO NEED for
the widespread proliferation of security cameras.
The news reports show images from a *particular* set of cameras *at* the
event, which is entirely *appropriate* given the threat level and the
need to protect the public at such events.
Now run along an go ping your VPN router. See if that can tell you anything.
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 7:50:42 PM4/19/13
to
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 8:09:28 PM4/19/13
to
criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>
>
>> and the ones the opposed it
>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>
>> **You already have someone better.
>
> Who would that be?
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 8:10:13 PM4/19/13
to
On 4/20/2013 9:48 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
> On 20/04/2013 9:39 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 9:34 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>>
>>> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
>>
>>
>> **Then I suggest you read or watch some news reports.
>>
>
> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
**Fuck off, you stupid cunt. Read the enws reports and/or watch the news.
> On 20/04/2013 9:39 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 9:34 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>>
>>> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
>>
>>
>> **Then I suggest you read or watch some news reports.
>>
>
> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 8:16:40 PM4/19/13
to
<unsnip>
<unsnip>
There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
I doubt that anyone has an issue with surveillance cameras used by
protective forces under strict protocols.
</unsnip>
It is perfectly logical to mount cameras (or enable them) at such an
event and then disable them afterward. There is absolutely NO NEED for
the widespread proliferation of security cameras.
The news reports show images from a *particular* set of cameras *at* the
event, which is entirely *appropriate* given the threat level and the
need to protect the public at such events.
Now run along an go ping your VPN router. See if that can tell you
anything.
</unsnip>
There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
I doubt that anyone has an issue with surveillance cameras used by
protective forces under strict protocols.
</unsnip>
It is perfectly logical to mount cameras (or enable them) at such an
event and then disable them afterward. There is absolutely NO NEED for
the widespread proliferation of security cameras.
The news reports show images from a *particular* set of cameras *at* the
event, which is entirely *appropriate* given the threat level and the
need to protect the public at such events.
Now run along an go ping your VPN router. See if that can tell you
anything.
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 8:33:15 PM4/19/13
to
On 4/20/2013 10:16 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
> On 20/04/2013 10:10 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 9:48 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>> On 20/04/2013 9:39 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:34 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>>>>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of
>>>>>>>> surveillance
>>>>>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the
>>>>>>>> Boston
>>>>>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **Then I suggest you read or watch some news reports.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
>>
>> **Fuck off, you stupid cunt. Read the enws reports and/or watch the news.
>>
>
> ROTFL. Twevor loses it.
>
> <unsnip>
> <unsnip>
> There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
**There you go. That wasn't hard, was it?
> On 20/04/2013 10:10 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 4/20/2013 9:48 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>> On 20/04/2013 9:39 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:34 AM, ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2013 8:47 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>>>>>>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of
>>>>>>>> surveillance
>>>>>>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the
>>>>>>>> Boston
>>>>>>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps
>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not aware of any "extensive use" of cameras.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **Then I suggest you read or watch some news reports.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
>>
>> **Fuck off, you stupid cunt. Read the enws reports and/or watch the news.
>>
>
> ROTFL. Twevor loses it.
>
> <unsnip>
> <unsnip>
> There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
Now read what I wrote.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 8:41:30 PM4/19/13
to
message news:ate2pd...@mid.individual.net...
ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence
Apr 19, 2013, 8:47:38 PM4/19/13
to
wuzzit the "extensive use" of targeted cameras?
The last IN RESPONSE TO:
"We will have a million CCTV cameras per square mile/kilometre before
they admit that monitoring the general population is a waste of time. In
the process they will dream up all sorts of reasons to maintain their
surveillance of the general population".
Fucken moron.
<unsnip>
ROTFL. Twevor loses it.
<unsnip>
<unsnip>
There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
<unsnip>
<unsnip>
There were *particular* cameras which helped to indentify the suspects.
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 9:05:26 PM4/19/13
to
"JohnJohnsn" <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1896ff01-99f7-4142...@e5g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Scout
Apr 19, 2013, 9:19:24 PM4/19/13
to
news:ate4m7...@mid.individual.net...
I do? Where did I do so?
>Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>
>>> **You already have someone better.
>>
>> Who would that be?
>
> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
IOW, you have no idea.
>Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>
>>> **You already have someone better.
>>
>> Who would that be?
>
> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
JohnJohnsn
Apr 19, 2013, 9:22:28 PM4/19/13
to
On Apr 19, 8:05 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> "JohnJohnsn" <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Updated April 18, 2013, 7:35 p.m. ET
The Gun Rights Consensus
The real reasons the Senate trounced the Obama agenda. .
'A pretty shameful day for Washington," President Obama called it,
with "pretty" being the only remnant of his famous cool. In the Rose
Garden, he blamed the failure of gun control in the Senate Wednesday
on three causes: "The gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about
the bill." The Senators who voted against it are cowardly and had "no
coherent arguments as to why we wouldn't do this. It came down to
politics." And finally "a minority was able to block it from moving
forward" through "this continuing distortion of Senate rules."
The media are amplifying Mr. Obama's themes with less subtlety, amid a
collective aneurysm in Washington and New York. Yet this combination
of animus and overreach explains why the post-Newtown gun debate has
been such a lost opportunity.
The President might have forged a compromise from the political center
out that reduced gun violence at the margins while respecting Second
Amendment rights. Instead, liberals cleaned out their ideological
cupboards in favor of gun restrictions that would have little
practical effect but would have notched a symbolic victory over the
National Rifle Association and those benighted rubes in the provinces.
By so overreaching, Mr. Obama couldn't even steamroll moderate members
of his own party.
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AQ684_1guns_G_20130418190605.jpg
A word, first, about that Senate "minority." Majority Leader Harry
Reid was free to bring the deal struck by West Virginia Democrat Joe
Manchin and Pennsylvania Republican Pat Toomey to the floor for an up-
or-down vote, and this background-checks amendment might have passed.
It did convince 54 Senators, including four Republicans.
But under Senate rules, a simple majority vote would have opened the
measure to up to 30 hours of debate, which would have meant inspecting
the details. The White House demanded, and Mr. Reid agreed, that
Congress should try to pass the amendment without such a debate.
Majority rules would have also opened the bill to pro-gun amendments
that were likely to pass. That would have boxed Mr. Reid into the
embarrassing spectacle of having to later scotch a final bill because
it also contained provisions that the White House loathes. So Mr. Reid
moved under "unanimous consent" to allow nine amendments, each with a
60-vote threshold.
The White House was right to worry. An amendment from John Cornyn of
Texas that would have required all states to recognize every other
state's concealed-carry permits earned 57 votes, 13 Democrats among
them. The nearby table has the list. On Thursday, Wyoming's John
Barrasso offered an amendment to protect gun ownership privacy that
passed 67-30.
Editorial board member Joe Rago on why gun control legislation is
likely dead in the Senate. Photos: Getty Images
.The media are attributing the demise of Manchin-Toomey to the clout
of rural states, as if those voters don't count; or claiming it would
have passed under a secret ballot, as if democratic accountability is
bad. Our guess is the amendment would have received fewer votes in a
secret ballot. Many red-state Democrats wanted to avoid handing Mr.
Obama a larger defeat on a bill that was about to fail anyway, but
more might have parted company once the specifics were scrutinized.
Manchin-Toomey was rushed together on a political timetable, and a
thorough scrub would have revealed that its finer legal points aren't
as modest as liberals claim. Tellingly, the White House blew up
earlier negotiations with Tom Coburn on background checks. The
Oklahoma Republican favored more and better checks across secondary
firearms markets like gun shows and online, but liberals insisted that
federally licensed dealers had to keep records.
In other words, keeping guns away from dangerous or unstable people
was less important than defeating the NRA. The Senate GOP offered an
alternative background-checks amendment that failed 52-48. Nine
Democrats were in favor, but their colleagues voted en masse to block
it from moving forward. How's that for incoherent?
Mr. Obama is technically right that Manchin-Toomey would not create a
federal firearms registry. Then again, its most clamorous supporters
are also contemptuous of the Second Amendment, and they are explicitly
hoping for a fifth Justice to overturn the Supreme Court's landmark
gun-rights rulings. Manchin-Toomey opponents can be forgiven for
worrying that gun controllers will attempt to build a registry from
whatever records they get.
***
Meanwhile, political reporters are ignoring the disintegration of Mr.
Obama's overall gun agenda. Restricting large capacity magazines went
down 46-54, with 10 Democrats breaking with the President. Banning
certain types of semiautomatic rifles failed 40-60 with 15 Democrats
opposed. Those 15 or so Democrats, along with numerous Republicans,
are the true mainstream on guns in America: open to reasonable
compromises as long as they safeguard individual rights.
People who cling to their guns, or merely to the Constitution, aren't
part of the coalition that Mr. Obama believes re-elected him, and his
mistake was thinking they would simply dissolve into history's
rearview mirror in his new progressive era. Mr. Obama was routed this
week because he tried to govern from the left and thus played into the
hands of the NRA. If the Newtown families want someone to blame, they
can start with the President.
[A version of this article appeared April 19, 2013, on page A14 in the
U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Gun
Rights Consensus.]
-30-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324493704578430672176449846.html
>
>
> "JohnJohnsn" <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1896ff01-99f7-4142...@e5g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>
>> On Apr 19, 5:33 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:7qi2n81nvsn8nfv7g...@4ax.com...
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Julia Liar <Julia.l...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>
>> On Apr 19, 5:33 pm, "Dechucka" <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:7qi2n81nvsn8nfv7g...@4ax.com...
>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechuck...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
>>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of
>>>>>> whom I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>>> checks
>
>>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>
>>> because the Senate is not representative of the populations views
>
>> Actually, the US senators are _more_ representative of their
>> "populations {GIC} views," as they answer to the voters of their WHOLE
>> state and not just those of the "territoriality" of the relatively
>> small segment of the state's population; like US representatives do
>> (excepting "The Granola State," that is: who put `Daffy Dianne' and
>> `Baba Boxter' back in office again; and Again; and AGAIN!).
>
> doesn't seem that way
REVIEW & OUTLOOK - Wall Street Journal
>
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
>>>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>
>>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
>>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
>>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
>>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of
>>>>>> whom I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
>>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>>> checks
>
>>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>
>>> because the Senate is not representative of the populations views
>
>> Actually, the US senators are _more_ representative of their
>> "populations {GIC} views," as they answer to the voters of their WHOLE
>> state and not just those of the "territoriality" of the relatively
>> small segment of the state's population; like US representatives do
>> (excepting "The Granola State," that is: who put `Daffy Dianne' and
>> `Baba Boxter' back in office again; and Again; and AGAIN!).
>
> doesn't seem that way
Updated April 18, 2013, 7:35 p.m. ET
The Gun Rights Consensus
The real reasons the Senate trounced the Obama agenda. .
'A pretty shameful day for Washington," President Obama called it,
with "pretty" being the only remnant of his famous cool. In the Rose
Garden, he blamed the failure of gun control in the Senate Wednesday
on three causes: "The gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about
the bill." The Senators who voted against it are cowardly and had "no
coherent arguments as to why we wouldn't do this. It came down to
politics." And finally "a minority was able to block it from moving
forward" through "this continuing distortion of Senate rules."
The media are amplifying Mr. Obama's themes with less subtlety, amid a
collective aneurysm in Washington and New York. Yet this combination
of animus and overreach explains why the post-Newtown gun debate has
been such a lost opportunity.
The President might have forged a compromise from the political center
out that reduced gun violence at the margins while respecting Second
Amendment rights. Instead, liberals cleaned out their ideological
cupboards in favor of gun restrictions that would have little
practical effect but would have notched a symbolic victory over the
National Rifle Association and those benighted rubes in the provinces.
By so overreaching, Mr. Obama couldn't even steamroll moderate members
of his own party.
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AQ684_1guns_G_20130418190605.jpg
A word, first, about that Senate "minority." Majority Leader Harry
Reid was free to bring the deal struck by West Virginia Democrat Joe
Manchin and Pennsylvania Republican Pat Toomey to the floor for an up-
or-down vote, and this background-checks amendment might have passed.
It did convince 54 Senators, including four Republicans.
But under Senate rules, a simple majority vote would have opened the
measure to up to 30 hours of debate, which would have meant inspecting
the details. The White House demanded, and Mr. Reid agreed, that
Congress should try to pass the amendment without such a debate.
Majority rules would have also opened the bill to pro-gun amendments
that were likely to pass. That would have boxed Mr. Reid into the
embarrassing spectacle of having to later scotch a final bill because
it also contained provisions that the White House loathes. So Mr. Reid
moved under "unanimous consent" to allow nine amendments, each with a
60-vote threshold.
The White House was right to worry. An amendment from John Cornyn of
Texas that would have required all states to recognize every other
state's concealed-carry permits earned 57 votes, 13 Democrats among
them. The nearby table has the list. On Thursday, Wyoming's John
Barrasso offered an amendment to protect gun ownership privacy that
passed 67-30.
Editorial board member Joe Rago on why gun control legislation is
likely dead in the Senate. Photos: Getty Images
.The media are attributing the demise of Manchin-Toomey to the clout
of rural states, as if those voters don't count; or claiming it would
have passed under a secret ballot, as if democratic accountability is
bad. Our guess is the amendment would have received fewer votes in a
secret ballot. Many red-state Democrats wanted to avoid handing Mr.
Obama a larger defeat on a bill that was about to fail anyway, but
more might have parted company once the specifics were scrutinized.
Manchin-Toomey was rushed together on a political timetable, and a
thorough scrub would have revealed that its finer legal points aren't
as modest as liberals claim. Tellingly, the White House blew up
earlier negotiations with Tom Coburn on background checks. The
Oklahoma Republican favored more and better checks across secondary
firearms markets like gun shows and online, but liberals insisted that
federally licensed dealers had to keep records.
In other words, keeping guns away from dangerous or unstable people
was less important than defeating the NRA. The Senate GOP offered an
alternative background-checks amendment that failed 52-48. Nine
Democrats were in favor, but their colleagues voted en masse to block
it from moving forward. How's that for incoherent?
Mr. Obama is technically right that Manchin-Toomey would not create a
federal firearms registry. Then again, its most clamorous supporters
are also contemptuous of the Second Amendment, and they are explicitly
hoping for a fifth Justice to overturn the Supreme Court's landmark
gun-rights rulings. Manchin-Toomey opponents can be forgiven for
worrying that gun controllers will attempt to build a registry from
whatever records they get.
***
Meanwhile, political reporters are ignoring the disintegration of Mr.
Obama's overall gun agenda. Restricting large capacity magazines went
down 46-54, with 10 Democrats breaking with the President. Banning
certain types of semiautomatic rifles failed 40-60 with 15 Democrats
opposed. Those 15 or so Democrats, along with numerous Republicans,
are the true mainstream on guns in America: open to reasonable
compromises as long as they safeguard individual rights.
People who cling to their guns, or merely to the Constitution, aren't
part of the coalition that Mr. Obama believes re-elected him, and his
mistake was thinking they would simply dissolve into history's
rearview mirror in his new progressive era. Mr. Obama was routed this
week because he tried to govern from the left and thus played into the
hands of the NRA. If the Newtown families want someone to blame, they
can start with the President.
[A version of this article appeared April 19, 2013, on page A14 in the
U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Gun
Rights Consensus.]
-30-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324493704578430672176449846.html
Trevor Wilson
Apr 19, 2013, 10:19:01 PM4/19/13
to
>
>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>
> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
discussion you and I have had.
>
>
>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>
>>>> **You already have someone better.
>>>
>>> Who would that be?
>>
>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>
> IOW, you have no idea.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Dechucka
Apr 19, 2013, 11:44:30 PM4/19/13
to
news:5c3cfaf9-0c2a-4103...@j20g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
your point is what? Why are you so scared of background checks?
snip
snip
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 12:05:12 AM4/20/13
to
message news:ate2pd...@mid.individual.net...
You should go back and try and understand the concept / def'n of democracy
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 12:21:48 AM4/20/13
to
> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
snip
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 12:23:05 AM4/20/13
to
message news:ate6t7...@mid.individual.net...
Your ignorance is showing again. The cameras in question were not specially
there for the event
there for the event
Scout
Apr 20, 2013, 1:53:38 AM4/20/13
to
news:atec94...@mid.individual.net...
In every single discussion there was no good, sane gun control being
proposed.
>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>>
>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>
> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single
> discussion you and I have had.
Point out a single good sane gun control law that I objected to.
After all, since we discussed it so much that should make it really easy for
you.
>>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>>
>>>>> **You already have someone better.
>>>>
>>>> Who would that be?
>>>
>>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>>
>> IOW, you have no idea.
>
> **I have a very good idea. I stated who that would be.
Who?
Sorry, but I don't see a single person's name listed.
proposed.
>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>>
>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>
> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single
> discussion you and I have had.
After all, since we discussed it so much that should make it really easy for
you.
>>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>>
>>>>> **You already have someone better.
>>>>
>>>> Who would that be?
>>>
>>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>>
>> IOW, you have no idea.
>
> **I have a very good idea. I stated who that would be.
Sorry, but I don't see a single person's name listed.
Trevor Wilson
Apr 20, 2013, 3:41:06 AM4/20/13
to
>
>
>>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>>>
>>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
>>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>>
>> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single
>> discussion you and I have had.
>
> Point out a single good sane gun control law that I objected to.
* ALL gun sales must be registered with government authorities. EVERY
SINGLE gun sale.
* EVERY SINGLE gun purchase must be subject to government approval.
* Semi-automatic firearms to be banned.
* Magazines holding more than 10 bullets to be declared illegal and
subject to severe punishmenrt, if found to be used.
* ALL firearms thefts to be reported to police.
* ALL firearms to be properly stored in appropriate, approved locked
containers when not in use.
* Appropriate checking to be implemented to ensure all legal
requirements are adhered to.
>
> After all, since we discussed it so much that should make it really easy
> for you.
>
>
>>>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **You already have someone better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who would that be?
>>>>
>>>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>>>
>>> IOW, you have no idea.
>>
>> **I have a very good idea. I stated who that would be.
>
> Who?
>
> Sorry, but I don't see a single person's name listed.
--
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au
Message has been deleted
Petzl
Apr 20, 2013, 5:11:56 AM4/20/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 04:20:58 -0400, NBC.Org wrote:
>Yesterday, one of the usual moonbats on MSNBC was babbling about the
>"family's deep roots in Boston." Too bad we don't have a death penalty
>here. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev might find out just how deep his roots would
>be - 6 feet deep.
The federal government is shortly going to lay off large swaths of its
workforce, including the military, yet the Office of Refugee
Resettlement (ORR) is still sending out announcements for applications
for micro-enterprise grants to non-profits so they can further
distribute your tax dollars to refugee ‘entrepreneurs’ who
truth-be-told want to get paid to care for their own kids and a few
others (of their own kind) in their own homes. What! they can’t use
existing American child care facilities?
https://researchfunding.duke.edu/detail.asp?OppID=12211
The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Administration for
Children and Families (ACF) is pleased to announce the availability of
funds for Refugee Home-Based Child Care Microenterprise Development
Projects. These projects are aimed at assisting primarily refugee
women in becoming economically self sufficient by providing home-based
child care services. Thus, recipients of grant awards through this
announcement will teach refugee women about local, state, and federal
child care laws, regulations and licensing requirements and about
cultural norms concerning child care and child care development. Also,
they will assist refugee women in English language acquisition,
advance educational attainment (GED) and improve economic
opportunities through application of acquired job skills in a market
where there is a shortage of childcare providers. Through this grant,
mentors will help primarily refugee women establish agreements or
contracts with State or county child care offices so they may qualify
for State/county childcare reimbursement as childcare service
providers.
Although the focus will be on refugee women, all services provided to
refugee women under this project are available to refugee men who are
able to benefit from these services.
--
Petzl
The Christian belief and fact is Moslems are deceived.
Like Schitzophreniacs,they need therapy;
Not confirmation of their delusions.
The recognized place of worship in a Christian Nation is a Christian Church.
Mosques are the recognized place of worship only in Moslem countries
Australia's only legally deined God is our Christian God whose compound redemptive name is Lord Jesus Christ
Something as simple as denying Moslems a place to pray is all it takes to make them leave voluntarily and peacefully.
>Yesterday, one of the usual moonbats on MSNBC was babbling about the
>"family's deep roots in Boston." Too bad we don't have a death penalty
>here. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev might find out just how deep his roots would
>be - 6 feet deep.
The federal government is shortly going to lay off large swaths of its
workforce, including the military, yet the Office of Refugee
Resettlement (ORR) is still sending out announcements for applications
for micro-enterprise grants to non-profits so they can further
distribute your tax dollars to refugee ‘entrepreneurs’ who
truth-be-told want to get paid to care for their own kids and a few
others (of their own kind) in their own homes. What! they can’t use
existing American child care facilities?
https://researchfunding.duke.edu/detail.asp?OppID=12211
The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Administration for
Children and Families (ACF) is pleased to announce the availability of
funds for Refugee Home-Based Child Care Microenterprise Development
Projects. These projects are aimed at assisting primarily refugee
women in becoming economically self sufficient by providing home-based
child care services. Thus, recipients of grant awards through this
announcement will teach refugee women about local, state, and federal
child care laws, regulations and licensing requirements and about
cultural norms concerning child care and child care development. Also,
they will assist refugee women in English language acquisition,
advance educational attainment (GED) and improve economic
opportunities through application of acquired job skills in a market
where there is a shortage of childcare providers. Through this grant,
mentors will help primarily refugee women establish agreements or
contracts with State or county child care offices so they may qualify
for State/county childcare reimbursement as childcare service
providers.
Although the focus will be on refugee women, all services provided to
refugee women under this project are available to refugee men who are
able to benefit from these services.
--
Petzl
The Christian belief and fact is Moslems are deceived.
Like Schitzophreniacs,they need therapy;
Not confirmation of their delusions.
The recognized place of worship in a Christian Nation is a Christian Church.
Mosques are the recognized place of worship only in Moslem countries
Australia's only legally deined God is our Christian God whose compound redemptive name is Lord Jesus Christ
Something as simple as denying Moslems a place to pray is all it takes to make them leave voluntarily and peacefully.
Message has been deleted
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 20, 2013, 8:08:30 AM4/20/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:47:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>
>> Yes or no- did it stop the bombing?
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>On 4/20/2013 8:31 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:27:56 +1000, Trevor Wilson
>> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> **You may care to note that it was the extensive use of surveillance
>>> cameras that have allowed the police and FBI to hone in on the Boston
>>> bommbing perpetrators so rapidly. Any future attempts by the perps has
>>> been effectively neutralised.
>>
>>
>
>**Read my words, you fucking moron. Here, I'll repeat them for you:
>
>"Any FUTURE attempts by the perps has been effectively neutralised."
>
>Is that any clearer?
That's even MORE stupid.
But it's what I expected from you.
keithr
Apr 20, 2013, 9:44:07 AM4/20/13
to
On 20/04/2013 8:26 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:04:14 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>> last night.
>
> Why would they be "gutless?" they have 90% of the population behind
> them.
>
> What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
>
No they don't 85% of the population are in favour of the measures that
they rejected.
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:04:14 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>>
>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>>
>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>> checks
>>>
>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>>
>> Gutless politicians, the"Daily show" did a major demolition job on them
>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>>
>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>> checks
>>>
>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>>
>> last night.
>
> Why would they be "gutless?" they have 90% of the population behind
> them.
>
> What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
>
No they don't 85% of the population are in favour of the measures that
they rejected.
keithr
Apr 20, 2013, 9:47:47 AM4/20/13
to
On 20/04/2013 7:22 AM, Blowjob = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>
>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>> are.
>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>
>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>> are.
>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>
>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>> who elected them.
>
> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to be
> in peoples' interest?
>
>
>
Duh? What part of "Putting their own interests before those of the
>> who elected them.
>
> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to be
> in peoples' interest?
>
>
>
public do you not understand"
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 20, 2013, 9:52:53 AM4/20/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 08:34:21 +1000, "Dechucka"
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:g3h3n851jkognl3rl...@4ax.com...
Or it shows that your 90% figure is complete bullshit.
Or it shows that it's just a worthless, stupid law.
<Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:g3h3n851jkognl3rl...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 07:04:14 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>>>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of
>>>>>> whom
>>>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>>>
>>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>>> checks
>>>>
>>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>>>
>>>Gutless politicians, the"Daily show" did a major demolition job on them
>>>last night.
>>
>> Why would they be "gutless?" they have 90% of the population behind
>> them.
>>
>> What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
>
>Snows how gutless they are
>>>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of
>>>>>> whom
>>>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>>>
>>>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>>>> checks
>>>>
>>>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>>>
>>>Gutless politicians, the"Daily show" did a major demolition job on them
>>>last night.
>>
>> Why would they be "gutless?" they have 90% of the population behind
>> them.
>>
>> What do they need? 95% 99%? 99.999999999%
>
Or it shows that your 90% figure is complete bullshit.
Or it shows that it's just a worthless, stupid law.
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 20, 2013, 9:53:24 AM4/20/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:44:07 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
Oh, now it's 85%.
[chuckle]
[chuckle]
Klaus Schadenfreude
Apr 20, 2013, 9:53:48 AM4/20/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:47:47 +1000, keithr <us...@domain.invalid>
wrote:
What interests might those be?
wrote:
keithr
Apr 20, 2013, 9:54:44 AM4/20/13
to
On 20/04/2013 9:48 AM, Blowjob = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence wrote:
> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
Pot kettle black you pathetic little twat.
> Don't you snip my posts, you pathetic little twot.
> Now run along an go ping your VPN router. See if that can tell you
> anything.
what a "VPN router" is.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 2:58:03 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:q4GdnUWsfcaw8e3M...@westnet.com.au...
news:q4GdnUWsfcaw8e3M...@westnet.com.au...
> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
Maybe most people in the US are not sheeple like YOU
> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:00:33 PM4/20/13
to
<Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>
>>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
> rights to bear arms.
>
> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
> (waiting for gun lovers to try to justify their existence .....)
> rights to bear arms.
>
> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>
> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
> deaths in Godz Own country!
>
> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>
> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
Well why don't you go after the ones doing most if not all the killing
The great majority are young black and hispanic males living in large cities
like Chicago, LA, Washington, Baltimore, etc who are involved with gangs and
drugs.
But that would actually require idiot sheeple like you to try to ACTUALLY
SOLVE THE PROBLEM instead of going after those who have done nothing wrong.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:01:16 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mrydnVed2_qf7-3M...@westnet.com.au...
>
> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>
>>>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>> rights to bear arms.
>>
>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>
>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>
>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>
>>>.... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>> rights to bear arms.
>>
>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>
>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>
>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>
> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
> checks
LOL
> checks
Sure, chucklehead.
Too bad that idiots like you two can't support that claim with ACTUAL DATA.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:02:20 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:itSdncX3uaHGkOzM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Sanders Kaufman" <Sister...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqnav$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>> On 4/18/2013 3:21 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>
>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>>
>> What planet are you getting your news from Skippy? Maybe the guy in the
>>>
>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>>
>> tinfoil beanie who gets a tingle up his leg when he sees Obama?
>
> Seem to know more about the situation than you do Putting your fingers in
> your ears and going ner ner doesn't change the situation
How could you know anything about anything, dechucklehead ?
You're not even smart enough to grasp the difference between correlation and
causation.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:03:42 PM4/20/13
to
"keithr" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:atfkcq...@mid.individual.net...
No they aren't
news:atfkcq...@mid.individual.net...
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:04:22 PM4/20/13
to
"keithr" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:atdpqh...@mid.individual.net...
> On 19/04/2013 11:49 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>>
>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>
>
Because apparently the Senators got quite a different message about how much
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:21:47 +1000, "Dechucka"
>> <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <Julia...@ALP.org.au> wrote in message
>>> news:atb948...@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:56:53 +1000 Dechucka stated:-
>>>>
>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>
>>>> Pretty sure it is the gun culture there - their so called "God given"
>>>> rights to bear arms.
>>>>
>>>> Violence breeds violence. And after a while people become immune to it.
>>>>
>>>> Since the Newtown School massacre, there has been > 3,513 further gun
>>>> deaths in Godz Own country!
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/dxx9724
>>>>
>>>> Sadly says a lot about the collective sanity of Americans, most of whom
>>>> I have dealt with are friendly people.
>>>
>>> and of course the vast majority from polls support universal background
>>> checks
>>
>> Then why didn't the bill pass?
>>
>
support there was..
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:05:33 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nMCdndT0wMq7ku_M...@westnet.com.au...
Other that ignorant dolts from down under like you ?
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:06:19 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2tGdnZ7GM4bukOzM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "John" <john...@oldwest.net> wrote in message
> news:ONudnRB-BdMIJu3M...@earthlink.com...
>> Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> You are an ignorant bastard, and you don't know what you are talking
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> about.\
>
> really? why?
Most likely your parents dropped you on your head a few times.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:07:09 PM4/20/13
to
"Sanders Kaufman" <Sister...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>
> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
dechucklehead is an Australian
He doesn't have rights
He's a subject of his government.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:08:25 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:svednasKjYVPkOzM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Sanders Kaufman" <Sister...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>
> How would background checks hinder your 2A rights apart from keeping guns
> "Sanders Kaufman" <Sister...@lipshitz.com> wrote in message
> news:kkqn81$474$1...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>> On 4/18/2013 2:56 PM, Dechucka wrote:
>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>
>> That's better than being a effeminate cunt like you who wants to take it
>> in the shorts rather than keep your Constitutional rights. You shouldn't
>> think so hard, your brain will just hurt.
>
> out of the hands of some criminals and psychos
That has yet to be demonstrated..
We do have the recent fiasco in NY State that demonstrates how easily things
can go wrong, and the rights of the innocent infringed by incompetent
bureaucrats.
Unlike sheeple like you, Americans are not as willing to be at the mercy of
incompetent bureaucrats.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:11:31 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:X6ydncIwFOnsTuzM...@westnet.com.au...
> message news:ate1ki...@mid.individual.net...
>> On 20/04/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>
>>> "ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence" <bjfost...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
>>> message news:atdqsq...@mid.individual.net...
>>>
>>> "ALP = Arrogance, Lies & Pretence" <bjfost...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
>>>> On 20/04/2013 7:06 AM, keithr wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2013 5:50 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless
>>>>>>> politicians,
>>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>>> are.
>>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>>
>>>>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>>>>> who elected them.
>>>>
>>>> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
>>>> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to
>>>> be in peoples' interest?
>>>
>>>>>>> politicians,
>>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>>> are.
>>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>>
>>>>> and are willing to put their own interests before those of the people
>>>>> who elected them.
>>>>
>>>> So according to your theory, elected officials should disregard the
>>>> wishes of those who elected them and do what they (or you?) regard to
>>>> be in peoples' interest?
>>>
>>> read what he said slowly
>>
>> Duh dat wot happen in a duh-mocracy, duh-chuckah
>
> That there is 90% support for background checks and that simple law is not
> passed. You have a strange idea of democracy
Not in the real world, chucklehead
>>
>> Duh dat wot happen in a duh-mocracy, duh-chuckah
>
> That there is 90% support for background checks and that simple law is not
> passed. You have a strange idea of democracy
Only in the fantasies of ignorant parrots like you
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:12:35 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:M_GdnSZCOvBiju_M...@westnet.com.au...
> message news:ate2pd...@mid.individual.net...
>> they will again face the electorate. Are you thick?
>
> You should go back and try and understand the concept / def'n of democracy
But the US is a Constitutional Republic not a PURE DEMOCRACY
Do come back when you understand the difference
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:18:47 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YPudnfSaVsMEWuzM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>> are.
>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>
>>
>> They are interested in re-election.
>
>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>
>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>> are.
>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>
>>
>> They are interested in re-election.
>
> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
What dead Americans ?
Oh wait, you're one of those idiots that believe (without and EVIDENCE) that
ANY gun control law is good, even when there is NOTHING to show that they
work...
So you're reduced to asinine appeals to emotion..
Got it.
SaPeIsMa
Apr 20, 2013, 3:19:44 PM4/20/13
to
"Dechucka" <Dechu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tMydnZdamsdvTuzM...@westnet.com.au...
>
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:kksjok$142$2...@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:ate000...@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:ate000...@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 4/20/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>> are.
>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>
>>>> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks couldn't be
>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless politicians,
>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents. The
>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these creatures
>>>>> are.
>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>
>>>> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
>>>
>>> **It would seem so. Except to a tiny handful of Republican senators and
>>> the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep those names in
>>> mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.
>>
>> Yep, the ones that voted for it need to go, and the ones the opposed it
>>> the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep those names in
>>> mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.
>>
>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>
> Why? Do you have a problem with background checks so some guns are kept
>
> out of the hands of people the law says shouldn't have them?
Too bad there is NOTHING to show that they would do anything like that.
Oh well
Idiots like you don't need EVIDENCE to support your beliefs.
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:26:10 PM4/20/13
to
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kkuoo6$k5u$1...@dont-email.me...
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:26:58 PM4/20/13
to
news:kc75n8d4ffor12d4l...@4ax.com...
I can only go on the polls
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:32:35 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuoo7$k5u$2...@dont-email.me...
Seems NRA members are
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/nra-support-for-background-checks-is-high-but-polls-predate-bill/2116374and othershttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/18/gabrielle-giffords/gabby-giffords-says-americans-overwhelmingly-suppo/>
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/nra-support-for-background-checks-is-high-but-polls-predate-bill/2116374and othershttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/18/gabrielle-giffords/gabby-giffords-says-americans-overwhelmingly-suppo/>
Scout
Apr 20, 2013, 5:35:10 PM4/20/13
to
news:atev54...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who said I do?
>>>>>
>>>>> **You object to good, sane controls on guns.
>>>>
>>>> I do? Where did I do so?
>>>
>>> **In every single discussion you and I have had regarding gun control
>>> laws.
>>
>> In every single discussion there was no good, sane gun control being
>> proposed.
>
> **That would your opinion. As shown by events, a wrong opinion.
If it's a matter of opinion then that means you can't really define exactly
what a good sane gun control law is other than it's something YOU approve
of.
Kind of like those people who can't tell you want an assault weapon is, but
they will know it when they see it.
>>>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
>>>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>>>
>>> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single
>>> discussion you and I have had.
>>
>> Point out a single good sane gun control law that I objected to.
>
> **I'll point out several:
>
> * ALL gun sales must be registered with government authorities. EVERY
> SINGLE gun sale.
It's insanity to assume criminals are going to register their illegal sales
on the black market.
Next?
> * EVERY SINGLE gun purchase must be subject to government approval.
Not good law, since we specifically have a protected right to keep and bear
arms, and thus don't need to ask for, or obtain permission.
> * Semi-automatic firearms to be banned.
Not good law since there is no reasonable basis for doing so, and of course
that all right to keep arms is still there.
> * Magazines holding more than 10 bullets to be declared illegal and
> subject to severe punishmenrt, if found to be used.
Not good law since there is no reasonable basis for doing so, and of course
that all right to keep arms is still there.
> * ALL firearms thefts to be reported to police.
It's insanity to assume criminals are going to report that their illegal
firearms have been stolen.
Sort of like a crack dealer complaining that someone has stolen his stock 'n
trade.
> * ALL firearms to be properly stored in appropriate, approved locked
> containers when not in use.
Insanity to assume such a law would suddenly make irresponsible people
responsible, and we're back to that whole getting permission from the
government on what containers are appropriate and approved.
> * Appropriate checking to be implemented to ensure all legal requirements
> are adhered to.
Insanity to assume criminals will be preforming any such checks.
See what I mean? No good sane gun control laws being proposed.
>> After all, since we discussed it so much that should make it really easy
>> for you.
>
> **Indeed. Very easy.
And still waiting on just one example.
>>>>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **You already have someone better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who would that be?
>>>>>
>>>>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, you have no idea.
>>>
>>> **I have a very good idea. I stated who that would be.
>>
>> Who?
>
> **Asked and answered.
No it wasn't since it identifies no candidate running for US senate in my
state.
>> Sorry, but I don't see a single person's name listed.
>
> **I accept your apology.
So you can't read and comprehend English either.
> On 4/20/2013 3:53 PM, Scout wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:atec94...@mid.individual.net...
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>> On 4/20/2013 11:19 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:ate4m7...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:44 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:ate2sh...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 9:27 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:ate000...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
>>>>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:ate000...@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 8:39 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsA1A782B5E...@216.196.121.131...
>>>>>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:atc1j0...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:56 AM, Dechucka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> .... something as simple as universal background checks
>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed. Maybe the US is just a sick and violent society
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> **Not so much. The US is saddled with a bunch of gutless
>>>>>>>>>>>> politicians,
>>>>>>>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>>>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these
>>>>>>>>>>>> creatures
>>>>>>>>>>> are.
>>>>>>>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American
>>>>>>>>>>>> people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> **It would seem so. Except to a tiny handful of Republican
>>>>>>>>> senators
>>>>>>>>> and the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep those
>>>>>>>>> names in mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yep, the ones that voted for it need to go,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Why do you support a criminal's right to obtain firearms?
>>>>>>>>>>>> politicians,
>>>>>>>>>>>> who value the opinions of the NRA more than their constituents.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of Americans are probably disgusted with their elected
>>>>>>>>>>>> senators. They need to be reminded of just how weak these
>>>>>>>>>>>> creatures
>>>>>>>>>>> are.
>>>>>>>>>>>> They're not interested in the well-being of the American
>>>>>>>>>>>> people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are interested in re-election.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> sad, so election is more important than dead Americans
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> **It would seem so. Except to a tiny handful of Republican
>>>>>>>>> senators
>>>>>>>>> and the majority of Democrat senators. Americans should keep those
>>>>>>>>> names in mind. Both the brave ones and the gutless ones.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yep, the ones that voted for it need to go,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who said I do?
>>>>>
>>>>> **You object to good, sane controls on guns.
>>>>
>>>> I do? Where did I do so?
>>>
>>> **In every single discussion you and I have had regarding gun control
>>> laws.
>>
>> In every single discussion there was no good, sane gun control being
>> proposed.
>
> **That would your opinion. As shown by events, a wrong opinion.
If it's a matter of opinion then that means you can't really define exactly
what a good sane gun control law is other than it's something YOU approve
of.
Kind of like those people who can't tell you want an assault weapon is, but
they will know it when they see it.
>>>>> Therefore, you support a criminal's right to easily obtain firearms.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, one doesn't follow from the other, particularly when I haven't
>>>> objected to good, sane controls on guns.
>>>
>>> **You have objected to good sane gun control laws. In every single
>>> discussion you and I have had.
>>
>> Point out a single good sane gun control law that I objected to.
>
> **I'll point out several:
>
> * ALL gun sales must be registered with government authorities. EVERY
> SINGLE gun sale.
It's insanity to assume criminals are going to register their illegal sales
on the black market.
Next?
> * EVERY SINGLE gun purchase must be subject to government approval.
Not good law, since we specifically have a protected right to keep and bear
arms, and thus don't need to ask for, or obtain permission.
> * Semi-automatic firearms to be banned.
Not good law since there is no reasonable basis for doing so, and of course
that all right to keep arms is still there.
> * Magazines holding more than 10 bullets to be declared illegal and
> subject to severe punishmenrt, if found to be used.
Not good law since there is no reasonable basis for doing so, and of course
that all right to keep arms is still there.
> * ALL firearms thefts to be reported to police.
It's insanity to assume criminals are going to report that their illegal
firearms have been stolen.
Sort of like a crack dealer complaining that someone has stolen his stock 'n
trade.
> * ALL firearms to be properly stored in appropriate, approved locked
> containers when not in use.
Insanity to assume such a law would suddenly make irresponsible people
responsible, and we're back to that whole getting permission from the
government on what containers are appropriate and approved.
> * Appropriate checking to be implemented to ensure all legal requirements
> are adhered to.
Insanity to assume criminals will be preforming any such checks.
See what I mean? No good sane gun control laws being proposed.
>> After all, since we discussed it so much that should make it really easy
>> for you.
>
> **Indeed. Very easy.
And still waiting on just one example.
>>>>>>> and the ones the opposed it
>>>>>>>> need to stay unless we have someone better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who would that be?
>>>>>
>>>>> **A tiny handful of Republicans and most of the Democrats.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, you have no idea.
>>>
>>> **I have a very good idea. I stated who that would be.
>>
>> Who?
>
> **Asked and answered.
No it wasn't since it identifies no candidate running for US senate in my
state.
>> Sorry, but I don't see a single person's name listed.
>
> **I accept your apology.
So you can't read and comprehend English either.
Scout
Apr 20, 2013, 5:36:20 PM4/20/13
to
"keithr" <us...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:atfkcq...@mid.individual.net...
your support evaporates.
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:38:27 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuoo7$k5u$3...@dont-email.me...
They are scared of a gun lobby funded backlash at the next election when
memories of Sandy Point have dimmed. Is it true the NRA actually rates
politicians A,B<c ... on how well their support no gun laws?
memories of Sandy Point have dimmed. Is it true the NRA actually rates
politicians A,B<c ... on how well their support no gun laws?
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:39:43 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuovq$lsf$1...@dont-email.me...
what is it driven by? Give a good explanation of why keeping guns out of the
hands of some criminals and psychos is a bad idea
hands of some criminals and psychos is a bad idea
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:39:59 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuogk$i8t$3...@dont-email.me...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/18/gabrielle-giffords/gabby-giffords-says-americans-overwhelmingly-suppo/
>
>
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:41:21 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuogj$i8t$2...@dont-email.me...
but you don't know if the legal purcerser of guns have done anything wrong
or are ineligible without checks
>
>
or are ineligible without checks
>
>
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:42:36 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkuovq$lsf$2...@dont-email.me...
his premise was wrong. Poor John cant explain logically why something as
simple as universal background checks are a bad thing
simple as universal background checks are a bad thing
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:43:12 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkup7e$ngg$2...@dont-email.me...
why are you replying to me you moron
Dechucka
Apr 20, 2013, 5:44:00 PM4/20/13
to
news:kkup7e$ngg$1...@dont-email.me...
true when Senators are to scared of a gun lobby
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages