Ambush
 

TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume

No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. And not that far above either.

Do we really know how many outlaws have guns? I guess that if only one
outlaw turned in his gun after guns are regulated, the plum's statement
would be true. Such brilliance from our skinny little waif in the forest.

Ambush
 

John H wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:29 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Ghttp://i45.tinypic.com/20ueijp.jpgo to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.

Space cadets see things through their own baby-blue glasses you know.


or this
http://i46.tinypic.com/2ceoopk.jpg

Ambush
 

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:07:38 -0500, Jim wrote:

John H wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:29 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Ghttp://i45.tinypic.com/20ueijp.jpgo to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.

Space cadets see things through their own baby-blue glasses you know.


or this
http://i46.tinypic.com/2ceoopk.jpg

Has Donnie been playing with his camera again?

Damn, that's gotta hurt!
--

John H

Ambush
 

John H wrote:
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:07:38 -0500, Jim wrote:

John H wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:29 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:01:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
Liberal bull****. That's right - bull****.

"Over the course of the 20th century, the UK gradually implemented
tighter regulation of the civilian ownership of firearms through the
enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts
leading to the current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic,
and most self-loading, firearms in the UK. The ownership of
breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly
controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland) to
those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine
humane killing of injured or dangerous animals.

Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC)
or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority
who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a "good reason"
for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may
place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of
ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are
put to. Historically, most certificates approved for handguns listed
"self defence" as a reason. Since 1968 in mainland Britain,
self-defense alone is not considered an acceptable "good reason" for
firearm ownership. Only in Northern Ireland is self-defence still
accepted as a reason. The police should not amend, revoke (even
partially) or refuse an FAC without stating a valid reason. (Section
29(1) of the 1968 Act gives the chief officer power to vary, by a
notice in writing, any such condition not prescribed by the rules made
by the Secretary of State. The notice may require the holder to
deliver the certificate to the chief officer within twenty one days
for the purpose of amending the conditions. The certificate may be
revoked if the holder fails to comply with such a requirement.)

Compare and contrast.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/no...shootings-rise

"They reveal that the number of actual shootings has almost doubled
from 123 to 236 in the last six months compared with the same period
last year, a rise of 91.8%. Serious firearms offences have risen by
47% across the capital."

That's a country with one of the strictest gun control legislation in
the world.

Criminals will still get guns - or even make them.

Violence will always happen. Ghttp://i45.tinypic.com/20ueijp.jpgo to your local max security prison
sometime and ask for a tour of their weapons museum - you'd be amazed
at how easy it is to make a .22 single shot hand gun from some simple
materials - never mind shanks, shivs, gasoline/butane in light bulbs -
you name it, anything can be weaponized. Don't have a bullet to use?
Rubber bands or shaved plastic handles from toothbrushes - a spring is
just as good at throwing a projectile as gunpowder.

Then again, I suppose it's prettier on your side of the divide what
with all the rainbows, unicorns and pretty elysian fields.
Space cadets see things through their own baby-blue glasses you know.


or this
http://i46.tinypic.com/2ceoopk.jpg

Has Donnie been playing with his camera again?

Damn, that's gotta hurt!


--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet,or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.

Do you think it was Donny who grabbed this shot of the Plum?

Ambush
 

In article ,
says...

TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume

No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. And not that far above either.

Do we really know how many outlaws have guns? I guess that if only one
outlaw turned in his gun after guns are regulated, the plum's statement
would be true. Such brilliance from our skinny little waif in the forest.

You mean the fat, nail chewing slob in Maryland...

Ambush
 

TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:



"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume

No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. And not that far above either.

You ****, only an idiot owns handguns.

--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet, or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.

Ambush
 

On Nov 30, 9:52*am, jps wrote:
TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

....
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume

No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. *And not that far above either.

You ****, only an idiot owns handguns.

Do you feel that using vulgarities will increase your masculinity?

Ambush
 

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:11:59 -0800, TopBassDog wrote:

On Nov 30, 9:52*am, jps wrote:
TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message

...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?

--
Nom=de=Plume

No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. *And not that far above either.

You ****, only an idiot owns handguns.

Do you feel that using vulgarities will increase your masculinity?

If some of you bozos would learn to read the headers you would know one of
your's is spoofing posters ID's. Your ID would be easy to spoof as you use
Google.

Feel better now.

Ambush
 

RLM wrote:
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:11:59 -0800, TopBassDog wrote:

On Nov 30, 9:52 am, jps wrote:
TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...
On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?
--
Nom=de=Plume
No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. And not that far above either.
You ****, only an idiot owns handguns.

Do you feel that using vulgarities will increase your masculinity?

If some of you bozos would learn to read the headers you would know one of
your's is spoofing posters ID's. Your ID would be easy to spoof as you use
Google.

Feel better now.



TopBass, GC, and half a dozen other posters here are spoofers. I think I
saw that JPS now has a spoofer here. Most of these ****heads don't even
have a boat...they just don't want anyone here whose ideas and positions
differ from theirs. They are the taliban of rec.boats.


--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet, or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.

Ambush
 

H the K (I post with a Mac) wrote:
RLM wrote:
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:11:59 -0800, TopBassDog wrote:

On Nov 30, 9:52 am, jps wrote:
TopBassDog wrote:
On Nov 29, 8:54 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message
...

On Nov 29, 5:01 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 12:54:08 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:
What Washington state needs in much stiffer gun laws, to ensure
these
murderous criminials will not be able to repeat this crime again.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
That's a canard. When guns are regulated, fewer outlaws have guns.
--
Nom=de=Plume
W-O-O-O-O-SH!
Sound of your brain getting flushed?
--
Nom=de=Plume
No , that is the sound of the least amount of intelligence flying
right over your head. And not that far above either.
You ****, only an idiot owns handguns.

Do you feel that using vulgarities will increase your masculinity?

If some of you bozos would learn to read the headers you would know
one of
your's is spoofing posters ID's. Your ID would be easy to spoof as you
use
Google.

Feel better now.



TopBass, GC, and half a dozen other posters here are spoofers. I think I
saw that JPS now has a spoofer here. Most of these ****heads don't even
have a boat...they just don't want anyone here whose ideas and positions
differ from theirs. They are the taliban of rec.boats.


I only come here to watch the nutcases and ****heads duke it out. The
more jerks that spoof me the better. I'm loving every minute of it.

--
If you are flajim, herring, loogy, GC boater, johnson, topbassdog, rob,
achmed the sock puppet,or one of a half dozen others, you're wasting
your time by trying to *communicate* with me through rec.boats, because,
well, you are among the permanent members of my dumbfoch dumpster, and I
don't read the vomit you post, except by accident on occasion. As
always, have a nice, simple-minded day.