I find this hard to believe... a 5 year old kills a 6 year old over a juice box, you are in the US not the Congo man!
hhmmm... how about banning this law in the first place, you don't need it to make your self feel safe that is absolut bullshit!
It is because of this law there are so many guns going around with which are commited homicides so often.
How often did I read that a boy gets killed in the US for entering his own home and got shot by his dad because his dad thought he was a burgler.
I never said that you have gun control the only stop revolutions, I said it was pretty handy of the gov to uphold this law. And I do not need to travel to the US to see how inner cities work, you do not need it period.
hhmmm... how about banning this law in the first place, you don't need it to make your self feel safe that is absolut bullshit!
It is because of this law there are so many guns going around with which are commited homicides so often.
How often did I read that a boy gets killed in the US for entering his own home and got shot by his dad because his dad thought he was a burgler.
I never said that you have gun control the only stop revolutions, I said it was pretty handy of the gov to uphold this law. And I do not need to travel to the US to see how inner cities work, you do not need it period.
either way if a revolt occurs or not the media will fli shit around like they have been doing
just because you dont see people taking to the streets on FOX dont mean they arent.
also, with habeas corpus now gone, anybody with balls is sure to be portrayed as a terrorist and locked away for an unlimited time without a trial.
"that'll teach those revolutionaries."
i believe a revolution can always be achieved, but we just need enough mother fucking humans to take responisbility for their lives and planet and humanity as the one body that it is.
welcome to the initiation of martial law, world currency, one world government, and the "United Nations"
its weird how bush seems to be doing exactly as hitler.
or the relation between his real last name and germany, while his grandpa funded a whole lot of the nazi war machine.
just because you dont see people taking to the streets on FOX dont mean they arent.
also, with habeas corpus now gone, anybody with balls is sure to be portrayed as a terrorist and locked away for an unlimited time without a trial.
"that'll teach those revolutionaries."
i believe a revolution can always be achieved, but we just need enough mother fucking humans to take responisbility for their lives and planet and humanity as the one body that it is.
welcome to the initiation of martial law, world currency, one world government, and the "United Nations"
its weird how bush seems to be doing exactly as hitler.
or the relation between his real last name and germany, while his grandpa funded a whole lot of the nazi war machine.
That is why you have a number of things, most importantly a state, and rule of law. Wow, this just in, the majority of people are effected by rulings and laws created and enforced by the criminal justice system. Thanks.
First sentence in the link to your site:
Estimating how many sexually transmitted disease or infection cases occur is not a simple or straightforward task.
Second problem with your site: STDs AND STIs.
You win that one. But the number of American graduates has increased substantially in the last 30 years. Also think about the population growth in the US from 1972 till 2003:
Approximately 27 percent of Americans over the age of 25 had a college degree. In 1972, that number was 12 percent. These figures come from an excellent downloadable chart released by the U.S. Census. The chart is entitled "Years of School Completed by People 25 Years Old and Over..." and was released on March 21, 2003.
The percentage of the U.S. population with high-school degrees reflects similar growth. In 2002, approximately 84 percent of the U.S. population had completed four or more years of high school. In 1972, that number was around 58 percent.
Forty five million is NOWHERE near the majority, and there are plenty who believe healthcare is not an entitlement.
The rest of your leaves no reason for reply. You have bitched about the state of the way things are and offered no solution and that makes you no better than the people you say should “not do what they are currently doing.”
First sentence in the link to your site:
Estimating how many sexually transmitted disease or infection cases occur is not a simple or straightforward task.
Second problem with your site: STDs AND STIs.
You win that one. But the number of American graduates has increased substantially in the last 30 years. Also think about the population growth in the US from 1972 till 2003:
Approximately 27 percent of Americans over the age of 25 had a college degree. In 1972, that number was 12 percent. These figures come from an excellent downloadable chart released by the U.S. Census. The chart is entitled "Years of School Completed by People 25 Years Old and Over..." and was released on March 21, 2003.
The percentage of the U.S. population with high-school degrees reflects similar growth. In 2002, approximately 84 percent of the U.S. population had completed four or more years of high school. In 1972, that number was around 58 percent.
Forty five million is NOWHERE near the majority, and there are plenty who believe healthcare is not an entitlement.
The rest of your leaves no reason for reply. You have bitched about the state of the way things are and offered no solution and that makes you no better than the people you say should “not do what they are currently doing.”
First of all not the exaggeration in the example.
Second, You have never been here right?
What law. What the hell are you talking about?
What law? What the hell are you talking about?
How often did you read? What is the purpose of your example? Have you been?
You have heard the real reason why this law exists. And again, you've never been here, pretty arrogant to think you know it all, and you need not experience a violent inner city filled with guns to understand why we need gun laws.
Second, You have never been here right?
What law. What the hell are you talking about?
What law? What the hell are you talking about?
How often did you read? What is the purpose of your example? Have you been?
You have heard the real reason why this law exists. And again, you've never been here, pretty arrogant to think you know it all, and you need not experience a violent inner city filled with guns to understand why we need gun laws.
And the state and rule of law creates INSTITUIONALIZED DEVIANCE, and this is a problem.
Do you understand that those in the criminal justice system (the minority) have a direct impact on the majority (those not indirectly involved in the system) and vice-versa? You are the one half-assing and saying, "the majority of people are not in the criminal justice system", but you fail to realize that the majority are PAYING for the minority that are presently in the cj system, and that the majority are directly affected by the ACTIONS of said minority which in turn means more laws, more regulations, and more rules to deter crime and deviant behavior.
Again, if the majority of the people had a stake (like you claim) the numbers would be down, we would not see an increase in type-1 crimes, and we would spend more dollars on restorative justice instead of the system we currently use.
Are you insane? No one is saying it is a simple or straight forward task, but researchers use the empirical method to come up with these numbers.
ASHA is a credible site, and all their attention is devoted to STD/STI research and prevention, and those numbers are most likely take from the CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2005.htm
If you have any evidence that disputes the numbers set forth by the CDC (which are basically the same numbers ASHA gave) please present them for everyone to see. I believe you fail to grasp what ASHA is actually stating. Do you realize that the numbers may actually be HIGHER not LOWER, due to the fact that people are not reporting their conditions or getting check-ups?
How is a credible site devoted to the research of sexually transmitted diseases and sexually transmitted infections a problem? :dead:
I'm winning on every single point, jimmy, but we aren't talking about the number of graduates and in an increase. As it stands the majority don't have college degrees. Let us move on.
No one has implied that forty five million IS the majority. I swear some of you people need to actually take a critical reading and thinking course at a local JC or CC. Let me go back to my previous post and quote something for you.
Now let us refer to the point you conviently left out when you quoted me.
Do you understand trickle down effects? Please, so we are on the same page, and so I am sure you understand, tell me what you think I am conveying here and we can move on.
Where am I bitching? You're the one painting a picture as if everything is peaches & cream, I'm simply showing a different perspective that contradicts and smashes your opinion. Do you see me saying people should do this or that? Do you see me making objections to anything aside from the wacky claims of those partaking in this thread? No. So, with that being said, show me the instance of "bitching" so I can once again have more ammo to show why you're a total idiot.
Do you understand that those in the criminal justice system (the minority) have a direct impact on the majority (those not indirectly involved in the system) and vice-versa? You are the one half-assing and saying, "the majority of people are not in the criminal justice system", but you fail to realize that the majority are PAYING for the minority that are presently in the cj system, and that the majority are directly affected by the ACTIONS of said minority which in turn means more laws, more regulations, and more rules to deter crime and deviant behavior.
Again, if the majority of the people had a stake (like you claim) the numbers would be down, we would not see an increase in type-1 crimes, and we would spend more dollars on restorative justice instead of the system we currently use.
Are you insane? No one is saying it is a simple or straight forward task, but researchers use the empirical method to come up with these numbers.
ASHA is a credible site, and all their attention is devoted to STD/STI research and prevention, and those numbers are most likely take from the CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2005.htm
If you have any evidence that disputes the numbers set forth by the CDC (which are basically the same numbers ASHA gave) please present them for everyone to see. I believe you fail to grasp what ASHA is actually stating. Do you realize that the numbers may actually be HIGHER not LOWER, due to the fact that people are not reporting their conditions or getting check-ups?
How is a credible site devoted to the research of sexually transmitted diseases and sexually transmitted infections a problem? :dead:
I'm winning on every single point, jimmy, but we aren't talking about the number of graduates and in an increase. As it stands the majority don't have college degrees. Let us move on.
No one has implied that forty five million IS the majority. I swear some of you people need to actually take a critical reading and thinking course at a local JC or CC. Let me go back to my previous post and quote something for you.
Now let us refer to the point you conviently left out when you quoted me.
Do you understand trickle down effects? Please, so we are on the same page, and so I am sure you understand, tell me what you think I am conveying here and we can move on.
Where am I bitching? You're the one painting a picture as if everything is peaches & cream, I'm simply showing a different perspective that contradicts and smashes your opinion. Do you see me saying people should do this or that? Do you see me making objections to anything aside from the wacky claims of those partaking in this thread? No. So, with that being said, show me the instance of "bitching" so I can once again have more ammo to show why you're a total idiot.
The inverse is more of a problem. You have the "stop snitching" movement (an example of the distrust / disbelief in the rule of law ) literally contributing to single digit rates of murders leading to prosecution in some communities.
The same could be said for any large-scale government program, be it food assistance, HUD, Sanitation, etc. Paying for government services for a disadvantaged or underprivileged minority if a reality of most if not all modern societies.
This is a value judgement; you are presupposing that only when a system is completely equitable do the majority have a stake. I dont believe 1. a truly equitable society exists in the world, and 2. that this sort of societal retribution for historical or systemic inequality is necessary to give the majority a stake.
STD researchers tend to bias in their own favor. We have all heard that 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 people has genital herpes. This is put forward largely by advocacy groups for people with STDs. In reality the numbers are probably closer to 1 in 10 or 1 in 20.
In addition, most STDs are not chronic and are, in fact, treatable. I highly doubt that you see large groups of people disenfranchised and disaffected due to STDs/STIs. Even Chlamydia, which supposedly affects 2% of our population, is not seen a major health crisis.
The same could be said for any large-scale government program, be it food assistance, HUD, Sanitation, etc. Paying for government services for a disadvantaged or underprivileged minority if a reality of most if not all modern societies.
This is a value judgement; you are presupposing that only when a system is completely equitable do the majority have a stake. I dont believe 1. a truly equitable society exists in the world, and 2. that this sort of societal retribution for historical or systemic inequality is necessary to give the majority a stake.
STD researchers tend to bias in their own favor. We have all heard that 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 people has genital herpes. This is put forward largely by advocacy groups for people with STDs. In reality the numbers are probably closer to 1 in 10 or 1 in 20.
In addition, most STDs are not chronic and are, in fact, treatable. I highly doubt that you see large groups of people disenfranchised and disaffected due to STDs/STIs. Even Chlamydia, which supposedly affects 2% of our population, is not seen a major health crisis.
I would type up something longer but I have been beaten to the punch by White Devil.
HERESY is welcome to see things his own way, which brings me to the point that the majority of people in the United States have found a stake in the system. That doesn't mean they arent completely happy and have nothing to change, that means the current system is better than any alternative for them.
HERESY is welcome to see things his own way, which brings me to the point that the majority of people in the United States have found a stake in the system. That doesn't mean they arent completely happy and have nothing to change, that means the current system is better than any alternative for them.
Stay out of my business.
The stop snitching movement is nothing new, and "no snitching" has been a "code" for hundreds of years now. You speak as if this so-called "movement" just started yesterday and is impeding every law enforcement agency in america from doing their duties, but in reality, botched police work and constitutional violations are more of a problem than this so-called movement, and as a result of these problems, less people are prosecuted.
Now, my question to you is how is this so-called movement related to institutionalized deviance?
No one is stating that it is not a reality for most industrialized societies, but you have to understand that when it comes to the CJ system it is entirely different from paying for large-scale government programs like food assistance, HUD and sanitation. Those in the cj system have violated the norms set before them, and because "we" feel threatened, we ask that crime be controlled. Where is the so-called "stake" when more money is being spent on prisions and not true rehabilitation and or restorative justice? Where is the true stake when the majority of people who plea bargain are actually innocent of the crime but plead guilty or no-contest because they don't have proper council? Where is the true stake when "we" shell out all this money to prevent crime yet still see an increase in overall crime? Where is the true stake when "we" demand new laws yet complain about being subjected to those very same laws?
No, it isn't a value judgement, and you can look at the current poverty line, homeless population and the gap between rich and poor for proof. This countries finances are not controlled by the majority, and neither is the direction of this country nor the policies that are made within it (aside from municipal statutes, etc.) This country is governed by the MINORITY, and it makes no difference if you believe they are reptiles from some obscure planet, devil worshippers from hell, or faggoty ivy league choir boys. The point is, the wealth and distribution of wealth is controlled by the few, and the majority have no true interest or stake in anything except for what may directly affect them. If the majority of people had a stake, socialism would be alive and well in america, and imperialism and capitalism would not exist here.
Post up numbers or something that discredits those numbers or shut the fuck up and go get your chemo treatment.
The CDC is not an advocacy group. :dead:
I posted something from the CDC which is where ASHA got there numbers, so unless you know of another agency in this country that is more credible than the CDC in the areas of DISEASE, stop saying "in reality". In reality, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, granted that isn't saying much, but don't come with that half-assed shit if you aren't going to post any numbers to validate your claim.
How is this important? No one is saying they aren't treatable, but the fact is, in many cases they are not treatable because the people don't seek help or don't report their illness.
Disenfranchised and disaffected in what arena? You can look at the rise in hiv positive cases in the black community for starters.
No, but Hep C and HIV ARE seen as major health crisis in and outside of america.
The stop snitching movement is nothing new, and "no snitching" has been a "code" for hundreds of years now. You speak as if this so-called "movement" just started yesterday and is impeding every law enforcement agency in america from doing their duties, but in reality, botched police work and constitutional violations are more of a problem than this so-called movement, and as a result of these problems, less people are prosecuted.
Now, my question to you is how is this so-called movement related to institutionalized deviance?
No one is stating that it is not a reality for most industrialized societies, but you have to understand that when it comes to the CJ system it is entirely different from paying for large-scale government programs like food assistance, HUD and sanitation. Those in the cj system have violated the norms set before them, and because "we" feel threatened, we ask that crime be controlled. Where is the so-called "stake" when more money is being spent on prisions and not true rehabilitation and or restorative justice? Where is the true stake when the majority of people who plea bargain are actually innocent of the crime but plead guilty or no-contest because they don't have proper council? Where is the true stake when "we" shell out all this money to prevent crime yet still see an increase in overall crime? Where is the true stake when "we" demand new laws yet complain about being subjected to those very same laws?
No, it isn't a value judgement, and you can look at the current poverty line, homeless population and the gap between rich and poor for proof. This countries finances are not controlled by the majority, and neither is the direction of this country nor the policies that are made within it (aside from municipal statutes, etc.) This country is governed by the MINORITY, and it makes no difference if you believe they are reptiles from some obscure planet, devil worshippers from hell, or faggoty ivy league choir boys. The point is, the wealth and distribution of wealth is controlled by the few, and the majority have no true interest or stake in anything except for what may directly affect them. If the majority of people had a stake, socialism would be alive and well in america, and imperialism and capitalism would not exist here.
Post up numbers or something that discredits those numbers or shut the fuck up and go get your chemo treatment.
The CDC is not an advocacy group. :dead:
I posted something from the CDC which is where ASHA got there numbers, so unless you know of another agency in this country that is more credible than the CDC in the areas of DISEASE, stop saying "in reality". In reality, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, granted that isn't saying much, but don't come with that half-assed shit if you aren't going to post any numbers to validate your claim.
How is this important? No one is saying they aren't treatable, but the fact is, in many cases they are not treatable because the people don't seek help or don't report their illness.
Disenfranchised and disaffected in what arena? You can look at the rise in hiv positive cases in the black community for starters.
No, but Hep C and HIV ARE seen as major health crisis in and outside of america.
Jesus will come back by the time a revoltuion occurs in thsi country.
The majority of people are content with where they are. This country would have to go the way of a 9th world country (sarcasm implied) before the people ever revolt against the government.
Again, in that era, you had specific problems brewing over time, and these problems were brewing for over 200+ years. What specific probelms are americans CURRENTLY facing that will lead to revoltuion?
As I have previously stated, "yes, this country is in a state of decay, but as long as the people are lied to and believe the lies it doesn't matter." Ask yourself how long have americans been lied to, and how long have americans believed the lies presented before them? If americans are kept from info pertaining to capitalism it doesn't matter if capitalism decays because the people will be too conditioned to come with anything else except for a new version of capitalism or something that has roots in capitalism.
All empires are destined to fall, but how hard they fall determines if they can come back or not.
Yet this info eludes the average american especially the working class.
The average man has been living uncomfortably since the great depression. The average man has been living uncomfortably since this country was first founded.
Again, a reply does not always imply interest.
Well, what happened?
By the time anything happens it will be too late and the people will be too weak and morally bankrupt to put up a fight. The ONLY way I can see a revolution happening now is if martial law is declared as a result from an attack on our soil (more specifically an attack on our soil that destroys bank records, finances etc.)
We are a materialistic people and our children have been conditioned to behave and think in the same manner.
We don't have any "problems" comparable to russia or germany, and the problems we did have were solved or pacified in the best manner possible.
In the case of civil rights 400+ years before things took a drastic change. With Nam I would say 20-40 depending on your take concerning americas policy after WW2.
No, what I am listing has a lot to do with the topic because they were a DIRECT result of the so-called revolution that you claim was won on many different levels.
There will be no revolution in america in this life time (unless teh scenario I mentioned earlier happens) and there will be no revolution in the future.
Massive problems like what? The government will always protect it's citizens, and ensure there safety. What problems are you talking about?
Yet the average american will go out and vote for the very same parties they claim they don't trust, and do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BESIDES VOICE THEIR FUCKING OPINION ON A POLL.
Let them "capture" Bin Laden, or "win" the war and everything will revert to normal within less than a day.
You make it evolve. You do away with aspects of it that are not beneficial or popular with the current society, and if you need to take a pay cut in order to keep everything in check, you do so. However, due to the fact that our finances are not controlled by "us" (us meaning the people) it should be easy to keep the ball rolling for another 100+ years (not including Chinas stake in global dominance.)
If it survives for that long for the most part yes.
You have the right to believe what you want.
No problem.
Each country will take turns exploiting the weak for their gain, and the ones that are most prolific will rise to the top. What is driving China right now? Surely it is not socialism.
What are these factors?
You speak as wine-bibber. Capitalism is in ind ecay, yet the average person does not know this. The tool will NEVER be useless as long as people are conditioned to believe and behave in a certain way. Listen, the game does NOT change. The only thing that changes are the faces and the players.
There was no split in the ruling class. Again, these people operate as one unit. Look at the current situation with Iraq. They say bring the troops home, but turn around and give them more money to actually stay. And no, the vietnam war was not stopped because they feared a revoltution would would topple teh current system. I mean seriously, who in their right mind would fear drug laden hippies?
I guess, remember, you're the one talking about "the ruling class" so who the hell are they?
Some would suggest the great depression was americas lowest point. How many revolutions occured during this time period?
It will always be a problem, and you're too brainwashed by socialism and marxism to see the reality of it.
People have been hearing about these things for YEARS even DECADES now and what do they do? Continue to spend outside there means, continue to fuck off money, continue to buy big ass SUV's, continue to resort to crime instead of education (in some cases I don't blame them) etc.
The majority of people are content with where they are. This country would have to go the way of a 9th world country (sarcasm implied) before the people ever revolt against the government.
Again, in that era, you had specific problems brewing over time, and these problems were brewing for over 200+ years. What specific probelms are americans CURRENTLY facing that will lead to revoltuion?
As I have previously stated, "yes, this country is in a state of decay, but as long as the people are lied to and believe the lies it doesn't matter." Ask yourself how long have americans been lied to, and how long have americans believed the lies presented before them? If americans are kept from info pertaining to capitalism it doesn't matter if capitalism decays because the people will be too conditioned to come with anything else except for a new version of capitalism or something that has roots in capitalism.
All empires are destined to fall, but how hard they fall determines if they can come back or not.
Yet this info eludes the average american especially the working class.
The average man has been living uncomfortably since the great depression. The average man has been living uncomfortably since this country was first founded.
Again, a reply does not always imply interest.
Well, what happened?
By the time anything happens it will be too late and the people will be too weak and morally bankrupt to put up a fight. The ONLY way I can see a revolution happening now is if martial law is declared as a result from an attack on our soil (more specifically an attack on our soil that destroys bank records, finances etc.)
We are a materialistic people and our children have been conditioned to behave and think in the same manner.
We don't have any "problems" comparable to russia or germany, and the problems we did have were solved or pacified in the best manner possible.
In the case of civil rights 400+ years before things took a drastic change. With Nam I would say 20-40 depending on your take concerning americas policy after WW2.
No, what I am listing has a lot to do with the topic because they were a DIRECT result of the so-called revolution that you claim was won on many different levels.
There will be no revolution in america in this life time (unless teh scenario I mentioned earlier happens) and there will be no revolution in the future.
Massive problems like what? The government will always protect it's citizens, and ensure there safety. What problems are you talking about?
Yet the average american will go out and vote for the very same parties they claim they don't trust, and do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BESIDES VOICE THEIR FUCKING OPINION ON A POLL.
Let them "capture" Bin Laden, or "win" the war and everything will revert to normal within less than a day.
You make it evolve. You do away with aspects of it that are not beneficial or popular with the current society, and if you need to take a pay cut in order to keep everything in check, you do so. However, due to the fact that our finances are not controlled by "us" (us meaning the people) it should be easy to keep the ball rolling for another 100+ years (not including Chinas stake in global dominance.)
If it survives for that long for the most part yes.
You have the right to believe what you want.
No problem.
Each country will take turns exploiting the weak for their gain, and the ones that are most prolific will rise to the top. What is driving China right now? Surely it is not socialism.
What are these factors?
You speak as wine-bibber. Capitalism is in ind ecay, yet the average person does not know this. The tool will NEVER be useless as long as people are conditioned to believe and behave in a certain way. Listen, the game does NOT change. The only thing that changes are the faces and the players.
There was no split in the ruling class. Again, these people operate as one unit. Look at the current situation with Iraq. They say bring the troops home, but turn around and give them more money to actually stay. And no, the vietnam war was not stopped because they feared a revoltution would would topple teh current system. I mean seriously, who in their right mind would fear drug laden hippies?
I guess, remember, you're the one talking about "the ruling class" so who the hell are they?
Some would suggest the great depression was americas lowest point. How many revolutions occured during this time period?
It will always be a problem, and you're too brainwashed by socialism and marxism to see the reality of it.
People have been hearing about these things for YEARS even DECADES now and what do they do? Continue to spend outside there means, continue to fuck off money, continue to buy big ass SUV's, continue to resort to crime instead of education (in some cases I don't blame them) etc.
yes in america we do need the right to have guns to feel safe. whether this actually makes us safer is a totally different question. and im sure you read over and over about the kid who shoots himself in the face, but never about the law abiding citizens who defend their own lives, or the women who kill would be rapists.
the reality is only people who abide laws will follow the laws. this seems simple, yet every proponent of gun control neglects to look at this. there is already a ban on murder, and that shit doesnt stop murder.
who was one of the first and biggest proponents of gun control on a national level? Hitler.
Look at the crime statistics in Australia, London, etc between before they banned guns and after and you will find crime goes way waaayyyyyyy up because criminals have one less deterrent. they know the people in the house they want to rob wont have guns, and the woman they want to rape wont have a gun. Its a field day. Go look at the facts. Australia is th emost recent example. If revolution isnt even possible with an armed public, it sure as fuck will never be possible without an armed public. thank you.
here is a taste:
Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
the reality is only people who abide laws will follow the laws. this seems simple, yet every proponent of gun control neglects to look at this. there is already a ban on murder, and that shit doesnt stop murder.
who was one of the first and biggest proponents of gun control on a national level? Hitler.
Look at the crime statistics in Australia, London, etc between before they banned guns and after and you will find crime goes way waaayyyyyyy up because criminals have one less deterrent. they know the people in the house they want to rob wont have guns, and the woman they want to rape wont have a gun. Its a field day. Go look at the facts. Australia is th emost recent example. If revolution isnt even possible with an armed public, it sure as fuck will never be possible without an armed public. thank you.
here is a taste:
Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Thats tends to be what you say when people start to run circles around you.
Your last comment warrants no response because, again, when you can't provide a reasonable response you attack someone who thinks different then you.
Goodbye for now Hearsay. Continue preaching "the way" until the next person calls you on it.
Your last comment warrants no response because, again, when you can't provide a reasonable response you attack someone who thinks different then you.
Goodbye for now Hearsay. Continue preaching "the way" until the next person calls you on it.
Well, as it stands YOU have NEVER run rings around ME, but you are entitled to wishful thinking. However, when people quote someoen and say "close this thread" they are in AGREEMENT with the person they quoted.
No, I provided you with credible info to destroy your position, your cohort attempted to fill your shoes, and because of that, I gave him the treatment that was reserved for you. You should have learned your lesson from past instances with me, but I guess you're a glutton for extreme punishment.
How original "maddog".
I will, and in the mean time I'll continue to son you and place you beneath my feet (as usual.)
No, I provided you with credible info to destroy your position, your cohort attempted to fill your shoes, and because of that, I gave him the treatment that was reserved for you. You should have learned your lesson from past instances with me, but I guess you're a glutton for extreme punishment.
How original "maddog".
I will, and in the mean time I'll continue to son you and place you beneath my feet (as usual.)